what is the literature in education

Recommended

Atticus Takes a Stand! Parent’s Perspective on ‘To Kill A Mockingbird’ from @HarperCollins

Holding Humanity in Open Hand…

• Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
• African American Literature
• Angelou, Maya
• April Fool's Day
• Atwood, Margaret
• Austen, Jane
• Award Winners
• Banned Books
• Behn, Aphra
• Bestsellers
• Black History Month
• Book Adaptations
• Book Destination
• Book Publishing
• Book Reviews
• Books & Titles
• Bookshelves
• Children's Books
• Children’s Picture Book Day
• Christie, Agatha
• Controversy
• Don Quixote
• Entertainment
• Erdrich, Louise
• Evanovich, Janet
• Fitzgerald, F Scott
• Fitzgerald, Zelda
• Frank, Anne
• Harlem Renaissance
• Hemingway, Ernest
• Holidays and Events
• Holocaust Literature
• Homework Help
• Inspiration
• King Arthur
• King, Stephen
• Klein, Naomi
• Life Lessons
• Little Mermaid
• Lost Generation
• Momaday, N Scott
• Native American Literature
• Patterson, James
• Rowling, JK
• Science Fiction
• Sexual Assault Awareness Month
• Shakespeare, William
• Storytelling
• Top Authors
• Twain, Mark
• Uncategorized
• Wharton, Edith
• Wiesel, Elie
• Women's Literature
• Young Adult

Don't miss it

Unleash Your Inner Word Wizard: Scrabble’s Gen Z Makeover Takes Word Games to the Next Level!

The Enigmatic Eclipse: Ancient Mythological Stories that Illuminate the Skies

Unlocking Literary Freedom: Discover the Truth about Banned Books in Hong Kong

Shattering Silence: How Book Banning Hinders Progress in Sexual Assault Awareness Month

Join Reese Witherspoon’s Book Club and Dive Into a Captivating Multi-Generational Must-Read

Celebrate the Magic of Storytelling: Unveiling the Colorful Pages of Children’s Picture Book History

About a book geek.

We bring you the best news, reviews, and insights on everything related to books, literature, lifestyle, and beyond. Check back for more details.

What’s Happening?

The Role of Literature in Education: Why It Matters

Literature is more than just entertainment or a way to pass the time. It can shape our perspectives, challenge our beliefs, and inspire us to brood over the world. Literature is a valuable tool for developing critical thinking skills, empathy, and creativity in education. This post will explore why literature matters and how it can benefit students of all ages.

Literature Promotes Critical Thinking Skills

Reading literature requires active engagement and analysis, which helps develop critical thinking skills. When students read literature, they are forced to think deeply about the characters, themes, and messages presented in the text. They must analyze the author’s choices and consider how they contribute to the work’s overall meaning. Critical thinking is essential for success in many areas of life, including academics, careers, and personal relationships. Literature helps students become more thoughtful and independent thinkers by promoting critical thinking skills.

You might also like

How to Memorize Textbooks: Tips and Tricks for Success

Literature helps develop empathy and understanding.

Besides critical thinking skills, literature also helps students develop empathy and understanding. Through reading about characters from different backgrounds and experiences, students can gain a deeper understanding of the world around them. They can learn to see things from different perspectives and develop greater empathy for others. This is important in today’s diverse and interconnected world, where understanding and empathy are essential for building strong relationships and communities. By exposing students to a wide range of literature, educators can help foster a more compassionate and understanding society.

Literature Encourages Creativity and Imagination

Reading literature can spark creativity and imagination in students. By exposing them to different styles of writing, unique characters, and imaginative worlds, literature can inspire students to think outside the box and develop their creative ideas. This is important in a world where we value innovation and creativity. By encouraging students to read and engage with literature, educators can help foster a generation of creative thinkers and problem solvers.

Literature Provides a Window Into Different Cultures and Perspectives

One of the most critical roles of literature in education is its ability to provide a window into different cultures and perspectives. By reading literature from different parts of the world, students can better understand the experiences and perspectives of people from different backgrounds. This can help to promote empathy and understanding and can also help to break down stereotypes and prejudices. This is an essential skill for students to develop in a world that is becoming increasingly diverse.

Literature Can Inspire Personal Growth and Self-Reflection

Literature has the power to inspire personal growth and self-reflection in students. By reading about characters who face challenges and overcome them, students can learn valuable lessons about resilience, perseverance, and the importance of a positive attitude. Literature can help students reflect on their own experiences and emotions and provide a safe space to explore complex topics and feelings. This can be important for students who may not have access to other forms of emotional support or therapy.

Esther Lombardi

Esther A. Lombardi is a freelance writer and journalist with more than two decades of experience writing for an array of publications, online and offline. She also has a master's degree in English Literature with a background in Web Technology and Journalism. 

Related Posts

Memorizing textbooks can be daunting, but it doesn't have to be. With the right techniques, you can make the process...

• 21.3k Followers

Introduction to Word Games and Their Popularity Word games have long been a beloved pastime for people of all ages....

Elie Wiesel’s ‘Night’ – Lines of Remembrance

Emily Dickinson: Examining the Influences and Impact of Her Revolutionary Poetry

What does atticus say – 7 ‘to kill a mockingbird’ quotes.

Practicing Gratitude Quotes

‘The Secret Garden’ of Writing

‘Little House’ – Writing the Story of Our Lives

© 2023 A Book Geek

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Remember Me

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Add New Playlist

- Select Visibility - Public Private

You cannot copy content of this page

Discover more from A Book Geek

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

Hooked on Classics

• Posted August 28, 2019
• By Jill Anderson

With every new book English teacher Jabari Sellars , Ed.M.’18, introduced to his eighth graders, Shawn had something to say:

“This is lame.”

“This is wrong.”

“Are you serious?”

At first Sellars dismissed the reaction as 13-year-old Shawn just not liking to read.

After all, the book selection for Sellars’ Washington, D.C., class resembled the lists used in a lot of American schools. The Iliad . Romeo & Juliet . The Book Thief . Lord of the Flies . So when Shawn suggested alternative titles — demonstrating how well-read and interested he truly was — Sellars realized he had a different problem: All we’re reading are books about white people.

In a quick attempt to offer something different, Sellars turned to another genre rarely used in schools — a comic book — only to fail again when students identified in the Astonishing X-Men another white male protagonist. Having grown up cherishing the classics, like many English teachers, Sellars hadn’t strayed too far from the influential and often very “white” literary canon — the books and texts considered to be the most important.

It’s been more than 50 years since literacy experts first stressed the need for more diverse books in the classroom, and yet reading lists look surprisingly the same as they did in 1970.

“People teach what they’re comfortable with, so the choices become this narrow realm of what you liked and what you’re familiar with,” says Senior Lecturer Pamela Mason , M.A.T.’70, Ed.D.’75, who directs the Ed School’s Language and Literacy Program. Moving away from the classics toward more diverse books can stretch “people’s imaginations and pedagogy,” she says, but it can also reveal how educators aren’t equipped for that change.

The canon has long been revered in public education as representing the “depth and breadth of our national common experience,” Mason says, the books that many believe all high school students should be studying. The problem is that what was once defined as “common” — middle class, white, cisgender people — is no longer the reality in our country. Unfortunately, Mason says, “making a case for new literature by different authors of color, authors who are not cisgendered, or even just female authors” is a challenge.

Liz Phipps Soeiro, Ed.M.’19, an elementary school librarian in Cambridge, realized the canon’s power after returning to the White House 10 Dr. Seuss books donated by First Lady Melania Trump in 2017. In a now viral blog post explaining her reasons, she wrote about disappearing school libraries, policies that work against underprivileged communities, and how although considered a classic, Dr. Seuss was “steeped in racism and harmful stereotypes.” People responded harshly through personal attacks and threats on Soeiro and her family.

“It’s more complex than ‘I want to throw Dr. Seuss away,’” she says, disputing the charge that she hates Dr. Seuss. While attending a children’s book conference 10 years ago, she saw no diverse books being highlighted and asked the book vendor why, only for the question to be dismissed. It forced Soeiro to think more deeply about inequities, realizing that books — even the most beloved — are part of systemic issues. “Knowing the history of this country and the history of our educational system really puts into sharp focus just how urgent it is to have representation in our books, stories, narratives, and media that we share with children,” she says.

Literacy experts have long called for more representation in children’s literature. In 1965, literacy champion Nancy Larrick’s Saturday Review article, “The All-White World of Children’s Books,” noted how millions of children of color were learning from books that completely omitted them.

Then, nearly 25 years later, children’s literary expert Rudine Sims Bishop reiterated children’s need for mirrors, windows, and sliding glass doors in books to “understand each other better” and “change our attitudes toward difference.” As she wrote in the 1990 publication Perspectives: Choosing and Using Books for the Classroom , “When there are enough books available that can act as both mirrors and windows for all our children, they will see that we can celebrate both our difference and our similarities, because together they are what makes us all human.”

Yet, in the past 24 years, multicultural content, according to book publisher Lee & Low, represents only 13% of children’s literature. Despite national movements like We Need Diverse Books and DisruptTexts, and despite a growing number of diverse books, only 7% are written by people of color.

Considering that the American student population is now 50% nonwhite, the need for that mirror — for opportunities for children to see themselves and navigate a more diverse world — seems more pressing. Much like Sellars’ students, children notice the lack of representation surrounding them. English teachers interviewed for this story, particularly at middle and high school levels, described how students complain about representation, cultural relevance, and boredom in text. Those complaints, especially boredom, signal to Mason a greater need for variety in the classroom.

The solution seems obvious: Add more books that represent LGBTQ issues, gender diversity, people of color, people with disabilities, and ethnic, cultural, and religious minorities. But even as teachers appear aware of a need to diversify the curriculum, there can be roadblocks to making it happen. For example, there’s a diversity gap in the book publishing industry regarding who gets published (mostly white authors), who gets awarded (mostly white authors), and which books make it onto school vendor booklists (mostly white creators). Add in the fact that new books are typically more expensive than classics, says Christina Dobbs, Ed.M.’06, Ed.D.’13, an assistant professor of English at Boston University, and it can be hard to make a case for change.

Even when teachers have the support of school administrators, funding, and autonomy over book selection, they still might feel lost.

“Some teachers might think, ‘I want to diversify the literature,’ but don’t know what to do with it,” says Lecturer Vicki Jacobs , C.A.S.’80, Ed.D.’86, a former English teacher who retired this summer as director of the Ed School’s Teacher Education Program. “They need to understand the multiple contexts — including background knowledge and lived experiences — that both they and their students bring to their reading and interpretations of those texts.”

This lack of understanding could explain why an elementary teacher of color from Virginia who attended a literature institute last year at the Ed School reported that she had discovered that other teachers in the school, who were predominantly white, weren’t using the more representative books she pushed for in the school library.

“It’s a mistake to think having the books gives people the tools to teach the books,” Dobbs says. In her role training teachers, she sees that many want to have conversations about diverse books but don’t know how. “We don’t have evidence that teachers can close that gap independently.”

Mason noticed similar apprehensions among educators, prompting her to create two professional learning experiences — an online module called Culturally Responsive Literature Instruction and its companion workshop on campus, Advancing Culturally Responsive Literature . Both programs, offered through the Ed School’s Professional Education program, focus on instructional literary practices that support and value the many identities present in the 21st-century classroom.

Last fall 51 educators, mostly teachers from the United States, gathered on the Ed School campus for a weekend spent learning how to bring new texts into their classrooms. There was plenty to discuss, like how to vet new books and develop a diverse curriculum to more predictable topics about meeting standards. (Common Core doesn’t identify required reading or tell you how to teach.)

Rachel Schubert, an 11th and 12th grade English teacher at Martha’s Vineyard High School in Massachusetts, attended the workshop to learn from other educators who are prioritizing this work. In her diverse classroom, she aims to strike a balance between the “classics” and multicultural texts like Ta-Nehisi Coates’ Between the World and Me and Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Namesake . Still, she knows many teachers who stick to a classics-only approach, insisting there are ways to teach old books with a different lens too.

Schubert finds new books and methods helpful in creating space for students to grapple with tough issues and questions about identity. “The kids I teach are extremely hungry for these experiences. Diversifying the curriculum is one way to reach them,” she says. “Once you start doing it, it’s not that scary anymore.”

Fear can be a powerful deterrent to making change in the classroom. When adding diverse books and readings, Schubert and Sellars already know the tricky scenarios — how to address stereotypes or not being able to answer a student’s question — that might keep teachers away from the work.

In a lot of ways, learning how to understand and discuss difference with students connects back to the need for diverse books in the first place.

“In our nation, we haven’t been good at learning how to talk across differences in a respectful way,” Mason says. “And that is supposed to be the fabric of our democracy.” When you add in the fact that teacher training hasn’t always included work about race and identity, or even about addressing cultural assumptions, it becomes easy to see how adding diverse books to the curriculum can seem like treacherous territory.

New books come under scrutiny even though they often contain similar elements as classics. For instance, consider the racialized language in Huckleberry Finn , or the treatment of disabilities in Of Mice and Men , or even the sexual content in Romeo & Juliet . But those books still maintain a place in classrooms around the country, whereas new books like The Hate U Give get challenged as “anti-cop” and for profanity, drug use, and sexual references, according to the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom. The book also happens to deal with racial injustices and police brutality, and is written by a black female.

“It’s kind of odd that we don’t have a problem giving students of color books written by dead white men, but we get a little queasy when we give white students literature written by African American authors, Latinx authors, transgender authors, Asian American authors,” Mason says. She suggests that, rather than banning books, we instead lead students through a balanced analysis of literature.

As educators try to diversify texts in their classrooms, they need thoughtful intent when choosing which books are appropriate or in determining the methods to teach material. Without that clear purpose, Jacobs fears teachers get lost, along with students, in the text. That purpose also helps safeguard against backlash when you know why you’ve selected certain work.

“A lot of people will see a brown child on the cover of a book and think that’s enough,” Soeiro says. But it’s not. “We have to look critically at the agency of that child, who wrote the book, the dominant narrative in the book. It takes a lot of work.”

It’s work, say educators like Soeiro and Dobbs, that teachers need to do.

“If all you read is one book by an author of color and five books a year by dead white guys, how does that shape your ideas about how stories get told, who they’re about?” Dobbs says.

In some ways, we already know. Today’s educators and students still exist in a canonized world, where prized books both teach and constrain us.

“An inherent part of developing culturally responsive instruction is coming to terms with our narrow view of literature,” Sellars says. “Making our classes culturally responsive may mean bringing in new texts and media, which means teachers will relinquish their position as experts. Many teachers are reluctant to introduce a new text, or even teach an old text from a different perspective, because doing so doesn’t allow them to rely solely on previous lesson plans and teaching strategies.”

After Sellars’ student made him see his “blind spots,” he could have kept everything the same. It would have been easier. But he spent the summer rethinking the reading list. The following year his eighth graders read newer, less canonized books: Ultimate X-Men , Persepolis , Black Boy White School , and excerpts from The Song of Achilles . The experience moved Sellars from what he describes as just talking about being culturally relevant to actually doing the work.

Mason believes a new culture of teaching literature will emerge, one classroom success at at a time, as long as we chip away at the lingering notion that diverse books aren’t worthy of teachers’ time and attention.

“When teachers learn about the cultural assumptions that made them leery about including new, multicultural literature, then learn how to teach the books, that sets them off in a stance of strength and knowledge. Then they have a couple of successes in the classroom,” Mason says. Describing the potential for that success to then snowball among fellow teachers, she adds, “Another teacher tries with their support, and they get successful too, and the new book starts to become part of a larger repertoire of literature to share.” When confronted with a book from the canon, it becomes, ‘Do we have to teach that book again on this theme?’ Well, here are some other options that might be worth a try.’”

Jill Anderson is a senior digital content creator at the Ed School and host of the Harvard EdCast .

Reloading the Canon

Ed. Magazine

The magazine of the Harvard Graduate School of Education

Related Articles

Navigating Book Bans

A guide for educators as efforts intensify to censor books

How to Teach Comprehensive Black History

Four approaches to meaningfully incorporate the stories of Black Americans into curriculum — beyond February

The Need for Asian American History in Schools

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• African Literatures
• Asian Literatures
• British and Irish Literatures
• Latin American and Caribbean Literatures
• North American Literatures
• Oceanic Literatures
• Slavic and Eastern European Literatures
• West Asian Literatures, including Middle East
• Western European Literatures
• Ancient Literatures (before 500)
• Middle Ages and Renaissance (500-1600)
• Enlightenment and Early Modern (1600-1800)
• 19th Century (1800-1900)
• 20th and 21st Century (1900-present)
• Children’s Literature
• Cultural Studies
• Film, TV, and Media
• Literary Theory
• Non-Fiction and Life Writing
• Print Culture and Digital Humanities
• Theater and Drama
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

• Philip Mead Philip Mead Department of English and Literary Studies, University of Western Australia
•  and  Brenton Doecke Brenton Doecke Faculty of Arts and Education (Emeritus), Deakin University
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190201098.013.1032
• Published online: 31 March 2020

Concepts of pedagogy that circulate within various educational contexts refer to the abstract and theoretical discourse about ways in which learners and students are introduced into fields of knowledge and established ways of knowing. But when pedagogical theory refers to the actual social apparatus that drives the production and reproduction of knowledge it is referring to the everyday activity of teaching. Teaching can be relatively un-self-reflexive and instrumental, or it can be self-reflexively aware of its own modes and processes ( praxis ) and grounded in an awareness of its social settings and learners’ experience. This article explores how pedagogy and teaching are bound up with the complex, disciplinary relation between literary knowledge and literary theory. Specific accounts of classroom interactions, from a range of national settings, are adduced to indicate the complexity of the relationship between theory, literary knowledge, and classroom praxis and the ways in which literary meaning making is mediated by the social relationships that comprise classroom settings. The article draws on research with which we have been engaged that interrogates the role that literary knowledge might play within the professional practice of early career English teachers as they negotiate the curriculum in school settings. The article also raises the question of how literary knowing outside of formal education systems and institutions can enter into what Gayatri Spivak calls the “teaching machine.” How do pedagogy and teaching account for and incorporate the myriad ways in which we learn about literature in broad social and experiential contexts?

• autobiography
• expressive realism
• literary education
• literary knowledge
• standards-based reform

Pedagogy and Teaching

What is known is always in excess of knowledge. Knowledge is never adequate to its object. —Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, Outside in the Teaching Machine

The word “pedagogy” points to a set of theories and practices that are constituted in relation to fields of knowledge. It is a word whose uses have to do with teaching and learning in general, with ideas about instruction and its applications that hover over actual educational contexts and practices. In this sense, thinking about pedagogy tends to move out and up from specific disciplines or fields of inquiry—such as English, media studies, or environmental humanities—into more abstract considerations about education and the reproduction of the social apparatuses of knowledge. The word has a more specific application in relation to the reproduction of knowledge and the generational transfer that underpins the continuation of particular fields of learning. This relationship typically presupposes the role of pedagogy as a driver of the ongoing production of knowledge domains, as well as ruling modes of learning even though it is understood as “theoretical,” that is, in some translational relation to teaching practice. 1 Thus the pedagogical aspect of education might seem to refer primarily to the abstract discourse about ways in which learners and students are introduced into fields of knowledge and inducted into the world as given, into learning about established ways of knowing.

The word “teaching,” on the other hand, refers to an open-ended process, an everyday practice that can happen anywhere and that is always more complex and more unpredictable than educators can plan for. 2 This difference between “pedagogy” and “teaching” is arguably buried in their etymologies. Of the two words, one is a noun only, while the other can be used as either a noun or (usually) an active verb. The grammatical and etymological differences are accentuated by the obvious Greek aspect of the word “pedagogy.” Although the word’s meaning has its origins in ancient Greek educational culture, since its reentry into European languages in the early modern period it has diverged from reference to the pedagogue or guardian toward the more abstract level of discourse about knowledge and learning just alluded to. Teaching, a word of Old English origin, describes an action, full of contingencies, something that teachers do in concrete social settings involving other people, most obviously their students and pupils (though there are also other players whose presence shapes what occurs within the social spaces of those settings).

In relation to the literary field specifically, there is also an anterior and fundamental instability concerning the status of knowledge that bears on this asymmetric equation between teaching and pedagogy. Alain Badiou postulates that “all true education does not only, nor even principally, rest on already-known knowledges, but on the Idea by which the becoming knowledges are organized.” 3 With literary knowledge in particular, since the last decades of the 20th century —especially since the era of “theory”—even the “already-known knowledges” of the field have regularly been characterized as undergoing “crisis.” 4 It is possible to argue that such crises have always constituted the field, even as far back as the emergence of literary studies, as such, in the late 19th century , with its exponents continually revisiting the rationale for their work, continually reappraising the very meaning of “literature” and the foundations of literary knowledge itself as focuses of inquiry and education. One of the fundamental binaries at work in this history of crisis is about where literary knowledge, in fact, lies: whether it is “inside” or “outside” literature, whether it belongs to aesthetics or to sociology. This set of dualities provides the focus for Roland Barthes’s essay on Racine (“History or Literature?”) where he characterizes literary inquiry as needing to be clear about its two constitutive elements: the history of literature as an institution, and the reading of literature as a creation. 5 This alternating current runs through all discourses of literary knowledge and literary education where it continuously destabilizes thinking about teaching and learning in relation to the institution of literary studies and the experience of the literary text itself. At one extreme it has given rise to a discourse that treats texts with radical suspicion, thereby destabilizing conventional understandings of meaning, identity, and group affiliation. At another extreme it gives rise to a conception of literature as a social technology, emphasizing the ethical uses of literary texts within a governmental or institutional system designed to produce certain kinds of social and subjective outcomes. 6 This is a use of literature that has little if anything to do with literary culture and the aesthetic, or questions of literary knowledge, which are marginalized as individual and privatized. The role of schools, and specifically the teaching of literature in the production of a citizenry is an abiding concern of much educational research. 7

Such an understanding of literary studies as constitutively divided and unstable challenges any assumption that what literature teachers do in their classrooms derives in any straightforward way from the “knowledge” they gained through completing a degree in literary studies. What knowledge about literature and literary theory, then, do they bring into the classroom? Does it still have currency, given the way literary-theoretical debates are played out, with their leading proponents continually reviewing the assumptions that underpin their work (e.g., Terry Eagleton’s trajectory from his initially iconoclastic Literary Theory: An Introduction [ 1983 ] to his subsequent attempts to reaffirm the centrality of “close reading” in studies such as How to Read a Poem [ 2007 ] or, by contrast, post-literary conceptualizations of cultural fields). 8 This instability that constitutes literary studies—or the vitality that arises from the way it continually reinvents itself—conceivably makes it a powerful example of “becoming” or “true” education, as Badiou defines it. What is the graduate student’s relation, though, to the vast edifice of “already-known” literary knowledge—creative, critical, and scholarly? Or the relation of that edifice to the endless questioning of the status of both “literature” and “theory”? And how does this notion of “becoming” resonate within the institutional settings that literary studies graduates encounter when they become teachers of literature and find their pedagogical practices mediated by complex institutional structures? These include mandated curricula and assessment regimes that seek to regulate and control in order to impose a stability based on what systems deem to be the knowledge and skills necessary for employment in a market economy and the perpetuation of existing social structures. All of which returns us to the vision of education as an induction into the world as given and reproduced.

Taken together, then, the words “pedagogy” and “teaching” suggest a duality, even a hierarchy, of theory and practice, linked as well to a duality of knowledge and knowing. Pedagogy is the abstract and reflective discourse about what does and should happen in classrooms, when educators enact a curriculum that derives from the fields of knowledge constituted by the academies and according to variously identified and mandated aims and standards of learning. Teaching, on the other hand, invokes the material conditions and subjective investments in any educational setting, not only those on the part of the teacher but also the intentions and perspectives that students bring with them into the classroom. With the word “pedagogy” the scales seem to be weighted away from classroom practice and the existential and local realities of teaching, giving rise to a need to use this word reflexively: This is an article, after all, about capital-P Pedagogy and might thus be said to be already part of the binary that structures any attempt to think about the relationship between literary theory and what teachers actually do in classroom contexts (and to understand how their literary theoretical knowledge might mediate their practice as educators). An aim of this article, then, is to address this bias in favor of “pedagogy” by re-theorizing teaching not just as practice but also as praxis : that is, practice self-consciously and self-reflexively grounded in concrete social settings and informed by theoretical-pedagogical awareness—less the application of a received knowledge (still less the transmission of a knowledge) than an action mediated by becoming knowledge, always, as Spivak suggests, exceeded by knowing itself. The implications of such a redress to the duality/hierarchy pedagogy/teaching goes not just to how we understand educational practice and theory but to how we understand knowledge and knowing.

Knowledge in the Present

The first decade of the 21st century has witnessed a refocusing within the field of educational research and policy on the question of the relationship between knowledge and curriculum, including how literary studies might provide a foundation for curriculum and pedagogy within school settings. 9 What follows in this article is informed by a longitudinal study we have been engaged in that interrogates the role that literary knowledge might play within the professional practice of early career English teachers as they negotiate the curriculum in school settings. 10 This research has focused specifically on the literary socialization that early career teachers have experienced in their childhood and adolescence, their education at both school and university, and how they have been able to bring the knowledge they have developed as literary studies graduates into the institutional settings they encounter when they join the English teaching profession: this means, in short, their transition from being students of literature to teachers of literature and all that mediates this process of becoming. This process is understood not as growth marked by a beginning point and an end point, with the stages of the journey signposted between, as though the transition from student to teacher lends itself to being formalized as a neat continuum. The focus of this educational research is on the tensions these early career teachers experience as they step into schools and try to make sense of their experiences within the frames of reference provided to them by their literary educations (or not, as the case might be). Their transition from students to teachers of literature is conceived as an often fraught and contradictory process, one marked by a divided self rather than anything that might be characterized as an unfolding of one’s professional identity (as in the self-vindicating myth about “preachers of culture”). 11

This research is in dialogue with other researchers in a range of national settings, often in the form of a critical engagement with their arguments. An influential body of work relevant to these exchanges is that of Michael Young, who advocates “bringing knowledge back in” to the secondary curriculum. 12 The primary function of schools, argues Young, is “to enable all students to acquire knowledge that takes them beyond their experience,” knowledge which “many will not have access to at home, among their friends, or in the communities in which they live.” 13 This is in contradistinction to a view that had formerly been influential in curriculum debates (a view that Young himself once advocated), that for a school curriculum to be meaningful it “should start with the interests and experiences of the children, their parents and the locality.” 14 This thinking about teaching, knowledge, and experience, however, does not escape the foundational imbalances of literary studies. First, teachers would hardly wish to discount the experiences that students bring to the classroom when they attempt to facilitate conversation around literary texts. To use the word “experience,” however, is not to posit some kind of personal realm that exists apart from the social—experience, including experience of the aesthetic, is always already mediated by social settings and those institutional structures that we associate with education. 15 Anyone’s becoming—anyone’s autobiography—takes the form of a continuing dialectic between one’s accumulated experience and knowledge and the new understandings that become available through engaging in other situations, which includes both formal and informal educational settings. As well, Young’s advocacy of what he calls “powerful” knowledge hardly provides a framework for understanding what teachers and their students actually do with literary texts in classroom settings, where knowledge does not primarily take the form of propositional knowledge of the kind that Young privileges. 16

In Young’s understanding, knowledge is stripped of its origins in particular social and educational relationships at certain moments in history and reified into an entity that embodies “universal truths”—he cites Newton’s laws of gravity and Shakespeare’s plays as examples of such “truths.” 17 Young’s research is arguably symptomatic of an era of educational reform that has been almost exclusively focused on education as a tool for economic growth and as a quantifiable social product, measurable by national and global standards. Education is something done to people in the interests of economic development and other policy blueprints that governments have produced since the 1980s, not something in which they can actively participate in the making of themselves. 18 Undoubtedly Young’s work is driven by an impulse toward enabling young people from working-class communities and other disadvantaged groups to gain access to cultural capital that has been denied them. 19 Yet despite his emphasis on the importance of knowledge as something that should be available to everyone, his rhetoric about “bringing knowledge back in” is easily co-opted by schemes for educational reform that focus primarily on national economic growth, where education is conceived as a matter of providing students with the necessary skills and knowledge to take their place in the economy, at the expense of any recognition of the value of the everyday cultures they participate in. Their local knowledges and cultures cannot simply be dismissed as “just experience” as something that should be displaced by knowledge that exists in a realm beyond their everyday lives but should be recognized as a vital resource that is already mediated in complex ways. As such their knowledges and experiences provide an inescapable context for thinking about and representing their world and their experience of language. 20

It is difficult to generalize about a whole sector of education such as the post-secondary one, especially given its different economic model from the secondary system, but there is an equivalent instrumentalization of higher education at work in many national settings, though with globalizing similarities. Concepts of knowledge that inhere centrally in literary studies and theory and that underpin understandings of subject formation as transformative and emancipatory have been displaced in the bureaucratized and managerialist university by incoherent approaches to disciplinarity, and the rhetoric of consumption, content delivery, skills acquisition and “learning outcomes.” Commodified knowledge (severed from individual learning) thus becomes a commodity that can be purchased on the market by informed consumers in order to increase their chances of getting a better job in the future or, put differently, a job which will provide the greatest “return in the global marketplace on their education investment. 21

Rich Particularities

Some work that has been conducted in the field of language education provides a counterpoint to the brutal insistence that school subjects should serve to induct students into accepted and instrumental forms of knowledge. German language educators, for example, within key educational journals such as Didaktik Deutsch and other publications and research forums, have drawn on the literary theoretical traditions available to them to produce increasingly subtle accounts of the ways in which students self-consciously engage with literary texts. Irene Pieper, for one, in a chapter entitled “Wissen im Zwischenraum” (“Knowledge in the Interstices”) ( 2016 ) analyzes the interpretive strategies that a teenage girl (in the eighth year at a Gymnasium) brings to a reading of Sarah Kirsch ’s ( b. 1935–d. 2013 ) poem, “Schnee”: “Schnee ein Brief mit Zaubertinte und vor langer Zeit geschrieben” (“Snow a letter in magic ink and written a long time ago”). The student speaks her thoughts aloud as she attempts to make meaning from the poem. Yet it is not only the manner in which she articulates her thoughts and feelings in response to the words of the poem but the way she continually returns to the poem, punctuating her reflections by re-reading the lines: “Schnee ein Brief . . . Schnee ein Brief mit Zaubertinte und vor langer Zeit geschrieben.” 22 As Pieper observes, the student knowingly engages in a “literary” reading, discounting her original attempts to interpret the poem and suspending the illogicality of supposing that something that melts away in a moment could convey a message that has been written long ago. But the girl laughs—“Gedichte müssen auch keinen Sinn machen” (“Poems don’t have to make sense”)—returning to the language of the poem, which she again reads aloud before teasing out other interpretive possibilities.

For this student, poetry is an unresolved, perhaps unresolvable use of language involving reading and re-reading where she cannot say for sure what the poem is saying. Reading poetic language means living with uncertainty, with the intimation of meaning only. It is within this interstitial space where such activities at the heart of the “literary”—a “literary praxis”—occur. 23 Such activities are not primarily directed toward scaffolding students into an ever more sophisticated body of knowledge “about” literature (although that is part of the aim), and obviously a teacher’s knowledge of literary theory becomes crucial in supporting students’ developing an increasingly sophisticated awareness of their interpretive practices when they engage in literary texts—an awareness that arguably distinguishes literary reading from the work we do when engaging with other kinds of texts. The readings that students perform, however, when they encounter literary texts do not amount to some kind of dummy run or apprentice’s work—it is not to be understood simply as a stage leading to somewhere else, nor is it experienced by readers in this way—but it is constitutive of the “literary” itself. It is not simply a starting point that will, with proper guidance, eventually see the student reach an appropriate level of maturity or cultural integration, but it is always already a literary praxis in its own right. Why, otherwise, would memories of our first reading of a story stay with us, replete with a recollection of the scene of the encounter and perhaps the people who were on hand, even when we may have since read the story again and again, each time with new insight? The “literary” does not name simply a professionalized body of knowledge—books, canons, normative interpretation, courses and programs, a literary critical repertoire validated by a huge machinery of scholarship—but is crucially bound up with moments of socialization, of entry into literature, and of teaching and learning. In that sense we can conceptualize literary education as autobiography, rather than exclusively in the form of an educational pathway that leads to somewhere else, reified as a set of desirable outcomes (as when we talk about graduate attributes, etc.). Systems may require such justifications, but we know that outcomes statements of this kind are never adequate to represent the complexity of the processes they name.

In London, Leila Ali, a student teacher, is struggling to engage a member of her class, Reece, in an English curriculum that includes Shakespeare and Tennyson, a curriculum that she feels is utterly alien to him and his peers and the street/urban culture to which they share allegiance. She observes that the students “were from a wide variety of ethnic backgrounds (mainly Afro-Caribbean, Somali, and Arab), but most had adopted, and were unified by, an urban/street culture and identity.” 24 Rather than being open to the invitation of “powerful knowledge” as Michael Young conceives it, the students resist schooling that is “attempting to assimilate them into a particular culture—a culture markedly different from their own—and they are skeptical about both the credibility and the desirability of the claim that schooling will automatically lead to social mobility” or economic security. 25 In an attempt to “engage Reece and many other students like him and bridge gaps between their two different cultures,” Leila introduces a rap, the British-Iraqi Lowkey’s “I Believe,” to the class, asking them to write their own raps in response. This is what Reece writes:

We need to overcome this poverty This racism should not be true I believe that we can chase our dreams Take a chance for our family Like Martin Luther King I have a dream I think this should not be true It should be equal for me and you To be able to walk down the street without people looking at me and you What makes you cry makes you stronger

Reece’s rap, which was performed for the class, shows his grasp of the genre of performance poetry and its activist rhetoric. This might be characterized as partly an intuitive grasp, but it is obviously something he has learned through interactions with his peers, outside formal educational contexts. His rap is the product of the sociability that characterizes the urban culture Reece belongs to, and its reception is marked by the same kind of sociability, though paradoxically enacted within a school setting. Just from the script we can tell how it might have engaged its audience immediately with its first-person plural beginning “we” then shifting to a positive rhetoric of overcoming racism, bolstered by the allusion to the powerfully iconic Martin Luther King. The unexpected reversal of the last line, “What makes you cry makes you stronger,” has both a poetic resonance and a strong rhetorical impact, given its up-ending allusion to a vast range of cultural uses, from Nietzsche to Steve McQueen to many popular music artists.

The stimulus for this piece of writing is shaped by Leila’s understanding of genre and the politics of knowledge; this is something she knows about from her own experiences as a Muslim woman living in multicultural London but that has also been formed by her university education, including her knowledge of Shakespeare. Her decision to focus on rap arises out of her evaluation of her students’ engagement in a series of lessons on Shakespeare. Reece’s reaction to Shakespearean language and imagery has been uniformly negative. When the focus of the lessons switches to rap poetry, the literary theoretical knowledge that Leila brings to her work can still be seen to mediate her exchanges with Reece, combined with her sensitivity to the dynamics of the social relationships that constitute this classroom setting. Crucially this involves entering into the “literary” through writing or composing (or creating), which in itself signals a kind of break away from the reified version of culture enshrined in the curriculum. The “knowledge” of early career teachers such as Leila, then, comprises both literary theoretical knowledge acquired through university study and an awareness of popular cultural forms as they arise out of the everyday lives of their students. The former provides a framework for appreciating the complexities of the latter and for appreciating how they make meaning through their form—as in Reece’s rap poem and his pronominal usage.

These concrete examples of teaching and meaning making on the part of students, as reported by these language and literature educators, provide a contrast to the large-scale scenarios about the role that education should play in economic reform and a national mission. Yet it is not simply that the irreducible quality of each incident resists the generalizations that underpin those reforms. One can sense an alternative logic—an alternative way of reflecting on the world we hold in common—with respect both to the ways meaning-making activities represented in these accounts unfold and the standpoints of the language educators as they attempt to gauge what they have learned from these adolescents. Both these incidents in their rich particularities are prompts for thinking about the nature of meaning making and learning about literature, as well as the applications of both literary and pedagogical theory as they occur around literary texts within classroom settings—not to mention the way in which a teacher’s own literary education mediates that learning.

Mediating Practice

The question of how literary knowledge mediates the exchanges between teachers and their students in classroom settings is hardly new—within the English-speaking world The Teaching of English in England of 1921 (popularly known as the Newbolt Report ) makes a passionate plea for the role that the literary imagination should play in the classroom, in contradistinction to an overemphasis on propositional knowledge. 26 It is possible to see traces of this discourse (and its characteristic binaries) in the way that English teachers understand and talk about their work. 27 Yet there is no doubt that our contemporary “professional knowledge landscape” means that these old debates are being played out in a historically specific way and that any claim about the value of the imaginative or creative activities that we have just been considering resonates differently in a world where everything appears to be geared toward regulation, underpinned by reified forms of knowledge and bureaucratized “standards.” 28

Much of the richly suggestive work on the teaching of literature that has arisen in contemporary literary education in Germany might be read against the backdrop of the so-called PISA crisis of 2000 , when Germany’s performance exposed gaps in its school system, sparking a national debate about educational standards that has since led to significant attempts at reform. 29 The inquiry into literary knowledge conducted by Irene Pieper and other German educators has occurred within the context of a larger debate about national educational standards, including the so-called Kompetenzen that students should be expected to learn in the course of their schooling, and of the role of literary and language education in the integration of refugee and immigrant populations. 30 The impulse behind this work could be interpreted as a desire to show that the practice of a literary reading as it features within school settings is every bit as rigorous as the practices of other knowledge domains. This rhetoric obviously runs the risk of reducing the teaching of literature to terms that are foreign to it—indeed, some of these writers cite authorities such as Michael Young and John Hattie (who pointedly exhorts teachers to “know thy impact factor”) in order to support the kind of focused attention to literature that they are advocating. 31 Yet within this body of work there are nonetheless signs of an increasingly refined appreciation of the complexities of a “literary” reading that challenges the assumption that all school subjects (and the knowledge domains from which they supposedly derive) should lend themselves to being organized in a rigidly hierarchical and sequential way associated with “science” and “scientific rationality.” 32

Thomas Zabka, in an essay that has recently been translated into English, teases out the “logic” of literary interpretation in contradistinction to the classificatory logic of the natural sciences. 33 Quoting Peter Szondi, he affirms that “texts present themselves in an individualistic manner, not in an exemplary one.” 34 When students engage with a literary text, they should be encouraged to attend to the distinctive ways that it uses the conventions of a genre (or genres) in order to make meaning, rather than supposing that anything has been gained by simply identifying the genre it might “belong” to. 35 Zabka’s starting point is that “literature is art” that “the study of literature is the study of an art,” which means that “to teach literature is to teach students about an art form, one of a range of art forms that might form the subject of aesthetic judgement.” 36 The word “aesthetic” perhaps belies the main impulse behind this essay: namely to plea for a return to valuing the experience of surrendering to a story, of immersing oneself in the imaginative world of the text, and in the process entering into the play between words and their meaning, as indispensable conditions for students to sustain an interest in reading “literary” texts. This understanding of the aesthetic is grounded in the sociology of consciousness and the understanding of the existential origins of literary meanings. Crucially, Zabka emphasizes the need to make reading “as it is commonly experienced and reported by readers” a focus of literary scholarship that will in turn enhance educators’ sensitivity toward how readers might discuss and reflect on their reading within classrooms. 37

Irene Pieper’s account of the young girl’s reading of the poem “Schnee” is an example of a refocusing on the experience of reading that Zabka desires, although it is not a reading that relies on any explicit ideas of the aesthetic or the pleasurable. Such refocusing opens up a new line of inquiry that might prompt literary scholars and educators to revisit their own education as readers, cultivating a self-awareness that could enable them to refine their understanding of the dialectic between literary knowledge and the exchanges that occur around literary texts in classrooms settings. In this respect, it is just as significant that the girl’s reading of “Schnee” leads to an admission of “Nicht-Verstehen” or “not-understanding,” to a sense of multiple interpretive possibilities, rather than producing a definitive judgment about the meaning of the poem. 38 This is to say that, for a teacher, her standpoint and practice as a reader properly form the main focus of attention, rather than any knowledge that exists outside this interpretive activity that might be formalized and rehearsed prior to her reading. This is in the expectation that it will be duly activated when she turns her attention to the chosen text. Yes, she brings knowledge and experience to the text—about snow, about ink—all examples of extra-textual framing that are a condition for any meaning making to occur. 39 Most crucially, for our purposes, she is able continually to refocus her reading of “Schnee” because she recognizes that it is a “poem,” a recognizable mode of language. But any appreciation of the meaning-making process that is occurring here needs to recognize that it unfolds in a “Zwischenraum,” as Pieper characterizes it—an interstitial space that paradoxically involves a preparedness to suspend judgment, to be alert to the play between what is both ordinary and non-ordinary language and meaning, rather than simply apply preexisting knowledge and understandings in order to make a definitive statement about the meaning of the poem. Her reading involves continuing dialogue with herself and conversation with others (the girl is asked how she would be likely to introduce the poem to her mother if she had the opportunity) in an effort to tease out the multivalent character of the words of the poem.

An emphasis on literary understanding ( literarisches Verstehen ) as a process, as distinct from positing literary knowledge ( literarisches Wissen ) as something that students should acquire is a feature not only of Irene Pieper’s work but that of other German educators she is associated with. That literary knowledge provides a vital resource for teachers of literature is not in contention (they all variously emphasize the way readers construct meaning through their interactions with texts, as distinct from supposing that the text’s meaning inheres within it, an insight that obviously arises out of the literary-theoretical debates since the 1980s. The question is how exactly this knowledge might productively mediate the teaching and learning that occurs in literature classrooms and if anything is achieved when teachers make such knowledge explicit. Whether it is knowledge about genre or a period in literary history, literary theoretical knowledge, as Kaspar Spinner observes, can both support and hinder a “literary” reading—all depends upon the teacher’s judgment as to when and how an intervention that actually supports a “literary” reading that is fully responsive to the specific character of the text might be made. 40

Such preoccupations are not peculiar to German language educators. John Yandell and colleagues associated with the journal Changing English , working within the UK policy context, have likewise posed the question of the relationship between literary knowledge and the interactions that occur within classroom settings. 41 Their focus is on literary language, not in the sense of some kind of privileging of the “literary” over other uses of language (indeed, they continually interrogate the values associated with the “literary” and “literature,” even as they use these words) but in order to differentiate the meaning making that occurs when anyone reads a poem or a story or for that matter composes a rap poem from other ways of engaging with texts. As with the German examples considered here this work has emerged in response to standards-based reforms, which in the United Kingdom have drastically restricted the parameters in which English teachers operate. Yandell and colleagues all take issue with those reforms and their culturally conservative nature. Students in the senior years, for example, are required to study texts originally written in English that supposedly embody the “best that has been thought and said,” and their capacity to respond to such texts is gauged solely according to their capacity to write essays under exam conditions. 42 Leila Ali’s story about Reece’s rap is an account of her struggle to create opportunities for her students to use language in ways that are meaningful to them, despite the constraints imposed by this policy environment.

A feature that distinguishes the work of Yandell and his associates from the German scholarship considered here is their more pronounced focus on how the reading and interpretation of literary texts are mediated by the social relationships that comprise classroom settings. Indeed, they argue that the meaning of a text is always the product of the social relationships in which it is read, always a product of classroom contexts, rather than something that exists in a realm apart from the transactions that occur there. Seminal here is Douglas Barnes’s vision of the communication that occurs in classrooms, which he sees as always being richer and more multifaceted than “what teachers plan in advance for their pupils to learn.” 43 A curriculum, according to Barnes, “made only of teachers’ intentions would be an insubstantial thing from which nobody would learn much.” The curriculum, rather, should be seen as something that teachers and their pupils “enact” (and therefore re-create), as they come together in “meaningful communication,” bringing their own experiences and values to the conversations that take place within classroom settings. 44

This vision of curriculum as “communication”—when curriculum becomes “embodied in the communicative life of an institution, the talk and gestures by which pupils and teachers exchange meanings even when they quarrel and cannot agree”—obviously includes the conversations that occur around literary texts in classroom settings, as Yandell, Brady, Turvey, and other educators have shown. In this respect, it is significant that Barnes’s own journey as an educator was one that took him from Cambridge, where he was a student of Leavis, to working as a secondary school teacher and collaborator with James Britton, Harold Rosen, and others in the London Association for the Teaching of English in the 1950s. This is a journey that he describes in his autobiography as a switch from “a reified version of culture to a culture that inhered in interpersonal and social interaction, and the active meanings they generated.” 45 This is how teaching English taught him to think about literature differently from the habits of mind and practices instilled in him by his Leavisite education. Some commentators have characterized the work of the so-called London school as involving a shift from a focus on literature (as advocated by Leavis) to a focus on the language of everyday exchanges. 46 But Barnes’s account in his autobiography of his transition from being a student of literature to a teacher shows that he did not dismiss the value of a literary education, in preference for “the immediate life, culture and language of the school student.” 47 He was concerned, rather, to think about the potential of such an education anew and to revitalize the notion of literary culture as something more than the pursuit of an elite few. 48 Classrooms, according to Barnes, should involve more than the transmission of knowledge but should enable students to develop perspectives on their everyday world that take them beyond what is given to entertain other possibilities, other ways of envisioning the world. This is what can happen through classroom talk. This is also what happens when that talk centers around a poem or a short story, as students step from the indicative to the subjunctive mood and reflect on what might happen, as the story they are reading unfolds or how they might respond to the play of meaning a poem involves.

Nearly a half a century later, Yandell and his associates might be characterized as attempting to renew Barnes’s vision, with the difference being that—in a way that represents a significant extension of Barnes’s work—they are able to draw on the literary theoretical resources that have emerged in the interim (the moment of “theory”) to refocus on the complexities of meaning making around literary texts and to show how literary texts mean different things in different educational settings. Monica Brady, for example, has written vivid accounts of how Palestinian students in Ramallah are able to make meaning from Shakespeare’s plays, generating a comparative perspective on Yandell’s accounts of teaching Shakespeare in London schools. 49 This brings to mind the Kurdish-Iranian refugee Behrouz Boochani’s account of life in a Manus Island detention center, No Friend But the Mountains ( 2018 ), which in its uses of poetic and autobiographical narrative gives a voice, self, and history to a member of the otherwise stateless, storyless mass of displaced and asylum-seeking people around the world. Both show meaning-making occurring in a “Zwischenraum” (to use Irene Peiper’s term again), dislodged from the nationalist framings that have done so much to compromise literary studies from its inception. 50

Where does “knowledge” sit within the classroom scenes that Yandell and others evoke? How does the literary education of a teacher figure within the exchanges that he or she is able to facilitate among pupils when they read the novels or plays or poems that are set for study? The issue, as Yandell poses it, concerns the assumption embedded in current research and policy discourse that knowledge is something that people possess like a commodity and that is nationally bounded. The many accounts of classroom interactions to be found in the work considered here serve to indicate the complexity of the relationship between literary knowledge and classroom praxis as these writers conceive it. They all involve a recognition of the challenges that teachers of literature experience in negotiating a policy context that conceives the reading of literary texts as primarily a means to differentiate between pupils in high-stakes assessment, in contradistinction to any recognition of reading as a social process in which readers share their interpretations of texts with one another.

Autobiographies

When poststructuralist understandings of literature were initially taken up by leading educators, they often produced accounts of classrooms that were every bit as reductive as the efforts by positivist researchers to reduce educational settings to places where it is possible to calculate the effectiveness of teaching with scientific precision. To borrow the language of Dorothy Smith’s critique of the tyranny of theory in ethnographic inquiry their work is characterized by a strong tendency to contain the complexities of classroom interactions around literary texts within a theoretical domain “stripped of local and biographical particularities” and the contingencies of classroom life. 51 Instructive here is a remarkable body of work directed at secondary English teachers that was produced in Australia (though one can also point to similar work in other Anglophone countries, such as the publications produced in the United Kingdom by the English and Media Centre), all directed at opening up new ways of engaging with texts that would enable students to move beyond what these educators construed as the disabling assumptions of the past. 52 This moment of radical transformation was heralded by the titles of influential texts within the field of English education, such as Pam Gilbert’s 1989 text Writing, Schooling and Deconstruction: From Voice to Text in the Classroom and Annette Patterson’s 1992 study “Individualism in English: From Personal Growth to Discursive Construction.” Classroom resources were produced that exposed the constructed-ness of texts, challenging readers to move beyond naïve judgments about how lifelike the scenes and characters were, or any expression of empathy for the characters, in order to analyze the ideological work that each text was performing: “How does each story ask to be read?” “Why do texts invite particular kinds of readings?” “What are the gaps and silences in a story?” 53 The literary theorists whom the writers of these resources drew upon are easy to spot. The text probably most often cited is Catherine Belsey’s Critical Practice ( 1980 ), in which she critiques what she calls “expressive realism,” the hegemonic view that “literature reflects the reality of experience as it is perceived by one (especially gifted) individual, who expresses it in a discourse which enables other individuals to recognize it as true.” 54 The educators mentioned took up what they saw to be the challenge of Belsey’s exposé of “expressive realism,” providing teachers with the tools to induct their students into the new literary theoretical lexicon that had become available to them. “Life,” “experience,” “empathy”—these words became suspect, to be replaced by a new lexicon including terms such as “gaps,” “silences,” “open,” and “closed” texts, “textual ideology” that signified a more critical stance on the part of readers toward the texts presented to them. Indeed, the word “text” itself as it was being used within the context of literary theoretical debates was new, displacing (as in Barthes’s essay, “From Work to Text”) reference to the literary work.

The paradox of these ideas was that they treated the reading habits of students prior to their exposure to poststructuralist understandings as a series of mistakes: a bundle of naïve assumptions and practices that needed to be corrected. With Annette Patterson, this standpoint takes the form of an autobiographical account of her “odyssey” as a reader, as she moves from the dubious assumptions that she associates with “personal growth” (as it was espoused by John Dixon in his influential account of the 1966 Dartmouth Seminar, Growth Through English ) to “post-structuralism.” 55 Her account of her professional learning has been wryly characterized by Harry Ballis and Paul Richardson’s Roads to Damascus ( 1997 ) as an example of a conversion story, replete with binaries structured around a “before” and “after” that characterize such narratives. Whether or not this claim does justice to Patterson’s attempts to open up new ways of reading texts that might (properly) displace the habitual practices that had come to dominate English curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment in Australia, it is nonetheless striking how any experience of one’s prior socialization as a reader is excluded from such accounts of the transformative effects that poststructuralist theory can supposedly have on reading, other than to treat it as a botched affair full of wrongheaded notions about the reading process. When, in Jack Thomson’s groundbreaking study Understanding Teenagers’ Reading ( 1987 ), an attempt was made to inquire into the pleasures that adolescents derived from reading literature, the rich detail of the teenagers’ accounts of their reading is belied by Thomson’s efforts to organize their responses in the form of a “developmental model,” beginning with “unreflective interest in action,” followed by activities such as “empathising” and “analogising,” which culminates in a “consciously considered relationship with the author, recognition of textual ideology, and understanding of self (identity theme) and of one’s own reading processes.” 56 And yet, as Thomson somewhat disarmingly admits, he had not actually been able to deduce this last level of engagement from anything that his interviewees had said to him. 57 This begs the question as to how students might reach this “reflexive understanding of their own reading practices” as a desirable level of maturity to be reached on the basis of their previous encounters with texts and the pleasures derived from them. 58

A similar failure to grapple with the question of how readers become readers—of how the educator becomes educated—is evident in Terry Eagleton’s work. Eagleton’s standpoint vis-à-vis the moment of “theory” has from the outset been a radically critical one—he sees “the story of modern literary theory” as one of a flight from “real history,” as an ideological obfuscation that “subordinates the sociality of human life to solitary individual enterprise.” 59 Yet his critique of the legacy of Arnold and Leavis that commences Literary Theory: An Introduction sees him doubting whether education can have any “transformative power” when it comes to tackling major social ills. He appropriates Marx’s famous aphorism from his “Theses on Feuerbach”—that “the educator himself needs educating”—construing this to mean that education “is, after all, part of society rather than a solution to it.” 60 Yet Marx’s statement is not one about how education is inevitably bound up with the perpetuation of existing society but the seeds of a critique (apropos the Jacobin Reign of Terror during the French Revolution) of all programs for social reform that suppose that change can simply be brought about by people lifting themselves up by their bootstraps in order to bring about radical social transformation. He is posing the paradox at the heart of efforts by social reformers to create a new world: that they are capable of entertaining a vision of a social alternative even though they themselves are the products of the society they are subjecting to vigorous critique. He is, in short, conceptualizing a program for social reform as an educational project, involving continual mediation between what “is” and what “ought” to be, as we reflexively engage with our thoughts and actions (our consciousness and being) in order to create a new world.

The examples of adolescents making meaning from texts that have motivated much of the foregoing discussion might be characterized in similar terms, as involving a dialectic between what “is” and what “ought” to be (or what “might” be), between the world as “I” experience it and a world that “we” might experience differently, between the indicative mood and the subjunctive mood. The paradox, however, (which Eagleton’s critique of the edifice of modern literary theory also curiously elides) is that our capacity to trace the subtleties of the interactions surrounding the reading of “Schnee” or Reece’s performance of his rap poem is largely the product of the insights that have become available to us through a literary education. This is certainly the case with the educators who facilitated these interactions. Research on the socialization of early career English teachers into the profession has provided powerful examples of their capacity to read the semiotic transactions that occur around the reading and writing of literary texts that derive from their own literary education. Here again we might take issue with Eagleton, but this time from another phase in his own autobiography as a reader. In more recent texts he has lamented what he perceives as his students’ incapacity to grapple with the formal quality of literary texts—they appear to be incapable of grasping the “literariness” of a novel, choosing instead to talk about it as though they are talking about people in their everyday lives. 61 Yet, like Leila Ali, many of the early career teachers whom we have interviewed have been sensitive to the ways form mediates experience, and—what is more—they are supremely aware of how their practice as educators is mediated by larger social and cultural contexts beyond the immediacy of the exchanges that occur between teachers and their pupils in classrooms—the flesh and blood encounters of everyday life. 62

The doctrinaire nature of poststructuralism as it was once espoused by some leading educators can be countered by refocusing on one’s autobiography as a reader—by reconceptualizing reading as autobiography—though care needs to be taken that such a refocusing acknowledges the way one’s “self” is mediated by multiple contexts, including institutional ones. (This refocusing is also a product of the insights that theory has made available to us.) We have said enough to indicate that such a refocusing means cultivating a sensitivity to the ways readers actually make meaning from texts and that attends to that meaning making without taking a judgmental stance, as though the pleasures that people derive from reading (young and old) always need to be subject to correction by educators. Educators themselves need to inquire into the conditions of their own education, to gauge reflexively the significance of moments in their own literary education and/or literary experience, the insights those moments yield, and the limitations they might reveal with respect to the knowledge and values that they bring to interactions with texts. Such moments have never been entirely solitary. Even a young girl’s reading of “Schnee” is not a solitary act—at the most obvious level, it is something performed in the presence of a researcher, but at a larger level (when one conceives it as a social activity mediated by larger contexts that are not visible) it is clearly the product of her literary socialization, and in that of multiple occasions that have centered on the reading of literary texts.

Systems of Knowledge

As people professionally involved in literature as a “social institution with specifiable material interests, organizational structures and social functions rather than simply [a] body of writing” teachers have a subjective and collective relation to their discipline and their subject, to both their institutional forms and their life in the seminar or classroom. 63 At the same time the sites and modes of their pedagogical engagements are powerfully prescribed by the bureaucratic settings and sequential hierarchies within which they work. When it comes to literary knowledge, the teaching and learning of it is always staged and temporally segmented, whatever the socioeconomic context of schooling or higher education may be. And those involved in literary education spend their working lives negotiating the stages, discourses, and paradigms of the institutions of literary knowledge.

So how can any pedagogical theory or teaching regime encompass the idea of a life course of recursive learning about literature, a corpus of work, and a mode of knowing that is constituted by the figural creativity and unresolved meanings of all human language, past and present? What are the values and relativities of meanings, for instance, at different stages of an individual’s reading life (a reading life that is probably never consistent or organized)? Do “mature” readings somehow discount the initial and formative encounters with literary texts of young readers and teachers? What is the status of “untutored” readings by the disenfranchised, refugees, or the marginalized, for example, as opposed to professionalized readings? Is Irene Pieper’s student’s learning about poetry (as well as language), for instance, more crucially formative than any later success she might achieve in “professionalized” literary study because it is a moment when she is learning to learn (about literary language)? With his creative and imaginative grasp of genre and popular forms is Leila Ali’s Reece on the path to rap artistry? How do teachers precipitate or guard the moment of learning to learn, or of the entry into the expressive (and political) potential of literary form? If literary knowledge is always contingent in the ways suggested here, as well as performative and historically, culturally, and politically situated, what are the limits of its organization and systematization? How do we learn beyond and against the institutionalized and professionalized forms of knowledge? Who can teach us, and how can we learn, antisystematically? Or, the other way round, how can literary knowing outside of formal education enter into the teaching machine (to use Spivak’s formula)? 64

One way to address such questions is to recognize the ways in which teaching and learning about literature are bound up with a large and complex range of social communities and individual pursuits beyond formal educational settings: communities such as book clubs, discussion and activist groups, literary festivals (talking and listening), private reading, and creative writing (both private and collective), the literary genres of marginal or unrecognized cultures, blogs, podcasts, and a variety of online communities. These dimensions coexist in complex ways, sometimes in contention with formal educational literary studies, sometimes in parallel with one another, and sometimes intersecting with one another—all challenging any naive binary of “knowledge” and “experience.” In relation to pedagogy and teaching the (literary) personal and interpersonal can provide a resource for thinking about literary praxis, about the myriad ways in which we learn about literature in the broader social and historical context. The secondary level is shaped by the levels of compulsoriness and framed by curricula that are necessarily prescriptive and directed toward instrumental purposes—local, national, assessment driven, vocational, personalist, etc.—as well as various limitations on texts read and studied, although there is also a literary sociability that teachers and students create in their common pursuit and that can include active, resistant, and dialogic teaching praxis.

At the ostensibly less regulated level of post-secondary education, the disciplinary context is one where the horizons of teaching and learning about literature and literary theory are framed by the dynamics of the system of literary knowledge overall. This is a massively complex global system, with whole universes of linguistic difference and translational networks and innumerable local, regional, and national instantiations within the world higher education system. Models of higher education pedagogy and teaching all reflect the institutionalization of disciplinarity, its ethics, praxis, and politics. And there are well-established modes of tertiary humanities teaching—the lecture, the tutorial, the seminar, the workshop, the supervisory session—as well as pedagogical discourse about those practices ( Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice , the MLA’s Profession and Options For Teaching series , for example). And yet this literary episteme is always subject to the further horizon of literary knowing, which is in fact as complex as the world itself, even in excess of that complexity given the literary imagination’s propensity for alternative and possible worlds. It is “theory,” which is the discourse that negotiates between the restless and unpredictable evolution of literary knowing and the teaching of the literary episteme. Just one example: Spivak’s essay “How to Teach a ‘Culturally Different’ Book” ( 1996 ) takes R. K. Narayan’s 1980 novel The Guide as an exemplar of a detailed and nuanced reading that follows an “itinerary from colonial through national to postcolonial and/or migrant subjects.” The essay, writes Spivak, has “tried to plot a few way-stations on that itinerary by reading a text of cultural self-presentation. The method of reading has kept to the representation of agency. These representations are gender-divided.” 65 Framing this reading is Spivak’s script for teaching praxis, a theoretically informed teaching of this text that stresses cultural difference in all its complexity, diversity, and multilevel nature and that is aware, at the same time, of the limits of the literary episteme and the further horizon of literary knowing:

[This reading] can timidly solicit the attention of the teacher of multicultural literature courses so that s/he can remain aware of the differences and deferments within ‘national identity’ and ‘ethnic minority,’ and not take the latter as the invariable starting-point of every decolonization of the mind. 66

Of course, there is no program or manual for the kind of praxis Spivak is describing. Not only is the literary knowledge of the teacher the result of endless and innumerable personal encounters and intersections with the institutions of literary study, including the autobiographical and professional, this knowledge about literature can never encompass more than a fraction of the world of literary knowing.

Beyond Pedagogy

The distinction between “pedagogy” and “teaching” with which we began is one way to gesture toward the open-endedness that continues to characterize the most productive exchanges around literary texts, including questions of theory—both in school and tertiary settings, in formal and informal settings. This is so, even when students’ engagement with literary texts is shaped by the demands of a competitive academic curriculum, when the reading of novels or plays or poems is reduced to serving instrumental purposes imposed by larger institutional or governmental mandates. Theoretically both “pedagogy” and “teaching” propose a future, but we use the words to differentiate between a vision of the future that is simply a continuation of the present, of the world as we know it, and a future that exceeds our current knowledge and that opens up the possibility of imagining our lives differently: between the world as adults see it, through the lens of their habitual practices and beliefs and the world as it might be seen with new eyes.

Bound up with this recognition of our responsibility as educators to enable our students to renew the world on their terms and not our own (or even society’s, collectively) is an openness toward what they bring to the conversations they encounter in literary classrooms. As well as Spivak, we can adduce other educators who have affirmed the primacy of the world of experience of learners vis-à-vis the theory and scholarship that a teacher brings to the encounters that take place in classrooms. Walter Benjamin affirms the capacity of children to bring together in their play “materials of widely differing kinds in a new, intuitive relationship.” 67 Elsewhere he describes the role of the writer as “beginning again at the beginning,” requiring a capacity to abandon habitual practices and values and to find within themselves the resources for cultural renewal. 68 Hannah Arendt defines the purpose of education as enabling children to undertake “something new, something unforeseen by us,” as equipping children “in advance for the task of renewing a common world.” 69 It is only in this way that we can commit to “renewal” and stave off “ruin,” which “except for the coming of the new and young, would be inevitable.” 70 The openness espoused by Spivak, Arendt, and Benjamin reflects a humility in relation to the children and the young in education systems, a recognition that any new beginning (if there is to be one) will ultimately occur in our absence.

But this is not to devalue the importance of educators, in the course of equipping their pupils for the task of historical and social renewal, of participating in that renewal themselves. How could education be conceived other than as a process of gladly learning and gladly teaching? A question that theories of pedagogy might start from. The value of the immense wealth of theoretical resources that have become available to educators since the moment of “theory” is that they enhance the capacity of educators to think otherwise and to respond to difference.

Discussion of the Literature

This article analyzes and references numerous important and influential examples of thinking about literary pedagogy and about teaching practice in the literary studies and English classroom. It also signals the comparative aspect of this literature, with analysis of relevant literature in Australia, the United Kingdom, North America, and Germany. See also P.-H. Van de Ven and B. Doecke’s Literary Praxis: A Conversational Inquiry Into the Teaching of Literature ; B. Doecke and P. Mead’s “English and the Knowledge Question”; P. Mead, “What We Have to Work With: Teaching Australian Literature in the Contemporary Context,” in Teaching Australian Literature: From Classroom Conversations to National Imaginings .

Links to Digital Materials

Changing English .

Didaktik Deutsch .

Pedagogy, Culture & Society .

Further Reading

• Arendt, Hannah . “The Crisis in Education.” In Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought . New York, NY: The Viking Press, 1976.
• Belsey, C. Critical Practice . London, UK: Methuen, 1980.
• Davidson, Cathy N. “The New Education and the Old.” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 133, no. 3 (May 2018): 707–714.
• Doecke, B. What Kind of “Knowledge” is English? (Re-Reading the Newbolt Report) . Changing English 24, no. 3 (2017): 230–245.
• Felski, R. The Limits of Critique . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2015.
• Spivak, G. C. Outside in the Teaching Machine . New York, NY, and London, UK: Routledge, 2009.
• Young, M. F. D. Bringing Knowledge Back In: From Social Constructivisms to Social Realism in the Sociology of Education . London, UK, and New York, NY: Routledge, 2008.
• Abraham, U. “On Their Own But Not Alone: The Difficulty in Competence-Oriented Approaches to Teaching Reading and Writing of Thinking of ‘Performance’ in Communal Terms.” Changing English 23, no. 3 (September 2016): 209–226.
• Abraham, U. , and Brendel-Perpina, I. Literarisches Schreiben im Deutschunterricht: Produktionsorientierte Literaturpädagogik in der Aus- und Weiterbildung . Kallmeyer in Verbindung mit Klett Friedrich Verlag: Sellze, 2015.
• Althusser, Louis . On Ideology . London, UK: Verso, 2008.
• Attridge, D. The Singularity of Literature . London, UK, and New York, NY: Routledge, 2017.
• Badiou, Alain . “Foreword.” In What is Education? Edited by A. J. Bartlett and J. Clemens , vi–vii. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press, 2017.
• Ball, S. , A. Kenny , and D. Gardiner . “Literacy, Politics and the Teaching of English.” In Bringing English to Order: The History and Politics of a School Subject . Edited by I. Goodson and P. Medway , 47–86. London, UK: Falmer Press, 1990.
• Ballis, H. , and P. Richardson . “Roads to Damascus: Conversion Stories and Their Implications for Literacy Educators.” English in Australia (October 1997): 110–117, 119–120.
• Barnes, D. From Communication to Curriculum . 2nd ed. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 1992.
• Barnes, D. Becoming an English Teacher . Sheffield, UK: National Association for the Teaching of English, 2000.
• Barthes, Roland . “From Work to Text.” In Textual Strategies: Perspectives in Post-Structuralist Criticism . Edited by J. V. Harari , 73–81. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1981.
• Barthes, Roland . “History or Literature?” In On Racine . Edited and translated by Richard Howard , 151–172. New York, NY: Performing Arts Journal Publications, 1983.
• Benjamin, W. “One Way Street.” In Selected Writings, 1913–1926 . Edited by M. Bullock and M. W. Jennings , 444–488. Vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2004.
• Benjamin, W. Understanding Brecht . Translated by A. Bostok . Introduced by S. Mitchell . London: Verso, 1973.
• Boochani, Behrouz . No Friend but the Mountains . Translated by Omid Tofighian . Sydney, Australia: Picador, 2018.
• Clandinin, D. J. , and F. M. Connelly . Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Landscapes . New York, NY: Teachers College Press, 1995.
• Corcoran, B. , M. Hayhoe , and G. M. Pradl . Knowledge in the Making: Challenging the Text in the Classroom . Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 1994.
• Doecke, B. , G. Parr , and W. Sawyer , eds. Language and Creativity in Contemporary English Classrooms 26, no. 2 (2014): 249–264. Putney, NSW: Phoenix Education.
• Doecke, B. , and I. S. P. Pereira . “Language, Experience and Professional Learning (What Walter Benjamin Can Teach Us).” Changing English 19, no. 3 (September 2012): 269–282.
• Doecke, B. “Lost (and Found) in Translation: Learning from German Language Educators.” Changing English 23, no. 3 (September 2016): 202–208.
• Doecke, B. “ What Kind of ‘Knowledge’ is English? (Re-Reading the Newbolt Report ) .” Changing English 24, no. 3 (2017): 230–245.
• Doecke, B. , and Philip Mead . “ English and the Knowledge Question .” Pedagogy, Culture and Society .
• Doecke, B. , and J. Yandell . “Language and Experience: Re-Reading Growth Through English.” In The Future of English Teaching World Wide: Celebrating 50 Years from the Dartmouth Conference . Edited by A. Goodwyn , C. Durrant , W. Sawyer , L. Scherff , and D. Zancanella . Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2019.
• During, S. Exit Capitalism: Literary Culture, Theory, and Post-Secular Modernity . London, UK, and New York, NY: Routledge, 2010.
• Eagleton, Terry . Literary Theory: An Introduction . Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1983.
• Eagleton, Terry . How to Read a Poem . Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2007.
• Eagleton, T. How to Read Literature . New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2013.
• Exton, R. “The Post-Structuralist Always Reads Twice.” The English and Media Magazine 10 (1982): 13–19.
• Faust, Mark A. “Alone but not Alone: Situating Readers in School Contexts.” In Knowledge in the Making: Challenging the Text in the Classroom . Edited by B. Corcoran , M. Hayhoe , and G. M. Pradl , 25–34. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 1994.
• Freudenberg, R. “Das Literarische literarischer Texte—Was nötig zu wissen ist.” In Wissen und literarisches Lernen: Grundlegende theoretisches und didaktische Aspekte . Edited by T. Möbius and M. Steinmetz , 29–42. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang, 2016.
• Frow, J. Genre . London and New York: Routledge, 2006.
• Gilbert, Pam . Writing, Schooling and Deconstruction: From Voice to Text in the Classroom . London, UK, and New York, NY: Routledge, 1989.
• Hattie, J. Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement . London, UK, and New York, NY: Routledge, 2009.
• Hunter, Ian . Culture and Government: the Emergence of Literary Education . Basingstoke and London, UK: Macmillan, 1988.
• Larrosa, J. “Herod, the Ogre . . . and Miss Cooper’s Rifle: Education as a Refuge for Childhood and the World.” In What is Education? Edited by A. J. Bartlett and J. Clemens , 153–184. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press, 2017.
• Lösener, H. “ Die Präzisierung der Subjektivität beim literarischen Lernen .” Leseräume: Zeitschrfit für Literalität in Schule und Forschung , Ausgabe 2 (2015): 72–84.
• MacLachlan, G. , and I. Reid . Framing and Interpretation . Carlton, Australia: Melbourne University Press, 1994.
• Mavelli, Luca . “ Widening Participation, the Instrumentalization of Knowledge and the Reproduction of Inequality .” Teaching in Higher Education 19, no. 8 (2014): 860–869.
• Mathieson, M. The Preachers of Culture: A Study of English and its Teachers . London, UK: George Allen & Unwin, 1975.
• Maton, K. “Languages of Legitimation: The Structing Significance for Intellectual Fields of Strategic Knowledge Claims.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 21, no. 2 (June 2000): 147–167.
• Medway, P. , J. Hardcastle , G. Brewis , and D. Crook . English Teachers in a Postwar Democracy: Emerging Choice in London Schools 1945–1965 . New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.
• Mellor, O’Neill , and A. Patterson . Reading Stories . Scarborough WA: 1987.
• Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) . Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians . 2008.
• Moore, R. , and J. Muller . “The Discourse of “Voice” and the Problem of Knowledge and Identity in the Sociology of Education.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 20, no. 2 (1999): 189–206.
• Newfield, Christopher . “Yes to the New Education, but What Kind?” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 133, no. 3 (May 2018): 686–693.
• Patterson, A. “Individualism in English: From Personal Growth to Discursive Construction.” English Education 24, no. 3 (October 1992): 131–146.
• Peim, N. Critical Theory and the English Teacher: Transforming the Subject . London, UK: Routledge, 1993.
• Pieper, I. “Wissen im Zwischenraum: Zur Spezifik der Frage nach verstehensrelevantem Wissen im literaturdidaktischen Reflexionsraum.” In Wissen und literarisches Lernen: Grundlegende theoretisches und didaktische Aspekte . Edited by T. Möbius and M. Steinmetz , 129–154. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang, 2016.
• Reid, I. “The Crisis of English Studies.” English in Australia 49, no. 2 (2014): 36–42.
• Reid, I. “Literary Theory and Teaching Practice: A Symposium,” Southern Review 21 (March 1988): 10–15.
• Severin, Constantin . “The Post-Literary Era, Leonardo’s Paradigm From Comparative Cultural Studies to Post-Literary Study. Gilles Deleuze and Central-European Thought. Post-Literature.” Human and Social Studies 5, no. 3 (October 21, 2016): 39–55.
• Shulman, L. “Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching.” Educational Researcher 15, no. 2 (1986): 17–23.
• Smith, D. Institutional Ethnography: A Sociology for People . Lanham, MD: Altamira Press, 2005.
• Spinner, K. H. “Literarisches Lernen.” Praxis Deutsch 200 (November 2006): 6–16.
• Spinner, K. H. “Wie Fachwissen das literarische Verstehen stört und fördert.” In Fachliches Wissen und literarisches Verstehen: Studien zu einer brisanten Relation . Edited by I. Pieper and D. Wieser , 53–70. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang, 2012.
• The Teaching of English in England , Departmental Committee, Board of Education. London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office, (1921) 1938. [Popularly known as the Newbolt Report.]
• Teese, R. Academic Success and Social Power: Examinations and Inequality . North Melbourne: Australian Scholarly Publishing, 2013.
• Teese, R. “The New Curriculum for English in Australia and Student Achievement Under the Old Curriculum.” In Creating an Australian Curriculum for English . Edited by B. Doecke , G. Parr , and W. Sawyer . Putney, Australia: Phoenix Education, 2011.
• Thomson, Jack . Understanding Teenagers’ Reading: Reading Processes and the Teaching of Literature . Norwood: Australian Association for the Teaching of English, 1987.
• Turvey, A. , and J. Lloyd . “Great Expectations and the Complexities of Teacher Development.” English in Education 48, no. 1 (2014): 76–92.
• Turvey, A. , J. Yandell , and L. Ali . “English as a Site of Cultural Negotiation and Creative Contestation.” In Language and Creativity in Contemporary English Classrooms . Edited by B. Doecke , G. Parr , and W. Sawyer , 237–254. Putney, Australia: Phoenix Education, 2014.
• Van de Ven, P.-H. , and B. Doecke , eds. Literary Praxis: A Conversational Inquiry Into the Teaching of Literature . Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense, 2011.
• Vischer Bruns, C. Why Literature? The Value of Literary Reading and What it Means for Teaching . New York, NY: Continuum International, 2011.
• West-Pavlov, Russell . “The Multicultural and Multilingual Classroom as a Provocation for German EFL Teaching.” 2019.
• Winkler, I. “Was die Diskussion über Wissen im Literaturunterricht über die Literaturdidaktik verrät—oder: Für einen selbstbewussteren Umgang mit Normsetzungen.” In Wissen und literarisches Lernen: Grundlegende theoretisches und didaktische Aspekte . Edited by T. Möbius and M. Steinmetz , 61–72. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang, 2016.
• Yandell, J. The Social Construction of Meaning: Reading Literature in Urban English Classrooms . Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2014.
• Yandell, J. “Knowledge, English and the Formation of Teachers.” Pedagogy, Culture and Society 25, no. 4 (2017): 583–599.
• Yandell, J. , and M. Brady . “English and the Politics of Knowledge.” English in Education , 50, no. 1 (2016): 44–59.
• Yandell, J. , B. Doecke , and Z. Abdi . “Who Me? Hailing Individuals as Subjects: Standardised Testing as an Instrument of Neo-Liberal Ideology,” 2020.
• Yates, L. , P. Woelert , V. Millar , and K. O’Connor . Knowledge at the Crossroads? Physics and History in the Changing World of Schools and Universities . Singapore: Springer, 2017.
• Young, M. , ed. Knowledge and Control: New Directions for the Sociology of Education . London, UK: Collier Macmillan, 1971.
• Young, M. F. D. , D. Lambert , C. Roberts , and M. Roberts . Knowledge and the Future School: Curriculum and Social Justice . London, UK: Bloomsbury, 2014.
• Zabka, T. (2016). “Literary Studies: A Preparation for Tertiary Education (and Life Beyond).” Changing English 23, no. 3 (September): 227–240.

1. See L. Shulman, “Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching,” Educational Researcher 15, no. 2 (1986): 17–23 ; and I. Reid, “Literary Theory and Teaching Practice: A Symposium,” Southern Review 21 (March 1988): 10–15 .

2. See D. Barnes, From Communication to Curriculum , 2nd ed. (Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 1992) .

3. Alain Badiou, “Foreword,” in What is Education? ed. A. J. Bartlett and J. Clemens (Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press, 2017), 6 .

4. I. Reid, “The Crisis of English Studies,” English in Australia 49, no. 2 (2014): 36–42.

5. Roland Barthes, “History or Literature?,” in On Racine , ed. and trans. Richard Howard (New York, NY: Performing Arts Journal Publications, 1983), 155 .

6. Ian Hunter, Culture and Government: The Emergence of Literary Education (Basingstoke, UK, and London, UK: Macmillan, 1988) .

7. See Louis Althusser, On Ideology (London, UK: Verso, 2008) ; and R. Teese, Academic Success and Social Power: Examinations and Inequality (North Melbourne: Australian Scholarly Publishing, 2013) .

8. Constantin Severin, “The Post-Literary Era, Leonardo’s Paradigm From Comparative Cultural Studies to Post-Literary Study. Gilles Deleuze and Central-European Thought. Post-Literature,” Human and Social Studies 5, no. 3 (October 21, 2016): 39–55 .

9. M. F. D. Young, Bringing Knowledge Back In: From Social Constructivisms to Social Realism in the Sociology of Education (London, UK, and New York, NY: Routledge, 2008) ; M. F. D. Young et al., Knowledge and the Future School: Curriculum and Social Justice (London, UK: Bloomsbury, 2014) ; and L. Yates et al., Knowledge at the Crossroads? Physics and History in the Changing World of Schools and Universities (Singapore: Springer, 2017) .

10. The research project, Investigating Literary Knowledge in the Making of English Teachers was funded by the Australian Research Council’s Discovery scheme (DP160101084).

11. See M. Mathieson, The Preachers of Culture: A Study of English and its Teachers (London, UK: George Allen & Unwin, 1975) ; The Teaching of English in England , Departmental Committee, Board of Education. (1921) 1938. London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office. [Popularly known as the Newbolt Report] .

12. Young, Bringing Knowledge Back In .

13. Young et al., Knowledge and the Future School .

14. See M. Young, ed., Knowledge and Control: New Directions for the Sociology of Education (London, UK: Collier Macmillan, 1971) ; and Young et al., Knowledge and the Future School , 29.

15. B. Doecke and J. Yandell, “Language and Experience: Re-Reading Growth Through English ,” in The Future of English Teaching World Wide: Celebrating 50 Years From the Dartmouth Conference , ed. A. Goodwyn et al. (Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2019) .

16. Young et al., Knowledge and the Future School , 28; B. Doecke and Philip Mead, “ English and the Knowledge Question ,” Pedagogy, Culture and Society 26, no. 2 (2018): 249–264; B. Doecke, “Lost (and Found) in Translation: Learning from German Language Educators,” Changing English 23, no. 3 (September 2016): 202–208 ; J. Yandell, “Knowledge, English and the Formation of Teachers,” Pedagogy, Culture and Society 25, no. 4 (2017): 583–599 ; and J. Yandell and M. Brady, “English and the Politics of Knowledge,” English in Education , 50, no. 1 (2016): 44–59 .

17. Young et al., Knowledge and the Future School , 65–66.

18. See, for example, Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA), Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians , 2008; and B. Doecke and I. S. P. Pereira, “Language, Experience and Professional Learning (What Walter Benjamin Can Teach Us),” Changing English , 19, no. 3 (September 2012): 269–282 .

19. See Young et al., Knowledge and the Future School , 13.

20. Young et al., Knowledge and the Future School , 18.

21. In the North American context, Cathy Davidson’s The New Education: How to Revolutionise the University to Prepare Students for a World in Flux , and the responses to that intervention deal with issues such as the defunding of public higher education and the reduction of higher education to “job preparation or ‘workforce readiness’,” (708) as well as the ideology that providing “college education to the masses lacks, for elites, an economic rationale” [Newfield, 690); see also Mavelli.

22. I. Pieper, “Wissen im Zwischenraum: Zur Spezifik der Frage nach verstehensrelevantem Wissen im literaturdidaktischen Reflexionsraum,” in Wissen und literarisches Lernen: Grundlegende theoretisches und didaktische Aspekte , ed. T. Möbius and M. Steinmetz (Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang, 2016), 134–135 .

23. See P.-H. van de Ven and B. Doecke, eds., Literary Praxis: A Conversational Inquiry Into the Teaching of Literature (Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense, 2011) ; and U. Abraham and I. Brendel-Perpina, Literarisches Schreiben im Deutschunterricht: Produktionsorientierte Literaturpädagogik in der Aus- und Weiterbildung (Kallmeyer in Verbindung mit Klett Friedrich Verlag: Seelze, 2015), 113–115 .

24. A. Turvey, J. Yandell, and L. Ali, “English as a Site of Cultural Negotiation and Creative Contestation,” in Language and Creativity in Contemporary English Classrooms , ed. B. Doecke, G. Parr, and W. Sawyer (Putney, Australia: Phoenix Education, 2014), 244 .

25. A. Turvey, J. Yandell, and L. Ali, “English as a Site of Cultural Negotiation and Creative Contestation,” in Language and Creativity in Contemporary English Classrooms , ed. B. Doecke, G. Parr, and W. Sawyer (Putney, Australia: Phoenix Education, 2014), 245 .

26. Newbolt, The Teaching of English in England .

27. Doecke and Mead, “English and the Knowledge Question”; and B. Doecke, “Lost (and Found) in Translation: Learning from German Language Educators,” Changing English 23, no. 3 (September 2016): 202–208 .

28. “Professional knowledge landscape” is a phrase borrowed from D. J. Clandinin and F. M. Connelly, Teachers’ Professional Knowledge Landscapes (New York, NY: Teachers College Press, 1995) .

29. See, for example, K. H. Spinner, “Literarisches Lernen,” Praxis Deutsch 200 (November 2006): 6–16; H. Lösener, “ Die Präzisierung der Subjektivität beim literarischen Lernen ”, Leseräume : Zeitschrfit für Literalität in Schule und Forschung , Ausgabe 2 (2015): 72–84.

30. See U. Abraham, “On Their Own But Not Alone: The Difficulty in Competence-Oriented Approaches to Teaching Reading and Writing of Thinking of ‘Performance’ in Communal Terms,” Changing English 23, no. 3 (September 2016): 211 ; and Doecke, “Lost (and Found) in Translation,” 203; and Russell West-Pavlov, “The Multicultural and Multilingual Classroom as a Provocation for German EFL Teaching” [2019] .

31. J. Hattie, Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement (London, UK, and New York, NY: Routledge, 2009) ; see R. Freudenberg, “Das Literarische literarischer Texte—Was nötig zu wissen ist,” in Wissen und literarisches Lernen: Grundlegende theoretisches und didaktische Aspekte , ed. T. Möbius and M. Steinmetz (Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang, 2016), 29–42 ; and I. Winkler, “Was die Diskussion über Wissen im Literaturunterricht über die Literaturdidaktik verrät—oder: Für einen selbstbewussteren Umgang mit Normsetzungen,” in Wissen und literarisches Lernen: Grundlegende theoretisches und didaktische Aspekte ., ed. T. Möbius and M. Steinmetz (Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang, 2016), 61–72 .

32. R. Moore and J. Muller, “The Discourse of ‘Voice’ and the Problem of Knowledge and Identity in the Sociology of Education,” British Journal of Sociology of Education 20, no. 2 (1999): 189–206 ; K. Maton, “Languages of Legitimation: The Structing Significance for Intellectual Fields of Strategic Knowledge Claims,” British Journal of Sociology of Education 21, no. 2 (June 2000): 147–167 ; see Moore and Muller, “The Discourse of ‘Voice’”; and see Maton, “Languages of Legitimation” for a defense of “science” and “scientific rationality” versus a postmodern emphasis on “voice discourse,” on the “knower” rather than the “known.”

33. T. Zabka, “Literary Studies: A Preparation for Tertiary Education (and Life Beyond),” Changing English 23, no. 3 (September 2014): 234.

34. Zabka, “Literary Studies.”

35. See Frow, Genre , 2–3.

36. Zabka, “Literary Studies,” 228.

37. Zabka, “Literary Studies,” 229.

38. Pieper, “Wissen im Zwischenraum,” 135.

39. Pieper, “Wissen im Zwischenraum,” 139; and G. MacLachlan and I. Reid, Framing and Interpretation (Carlton, Australia: Melbourne University Press, 1994).

40. K. H. Spinner, “Wie Fachwissen das literarische Verstehen stört und fördert,” in Fachliches Wissen und literarisches Verstehen: Studien zu einer brisanten Relation , ed. I. Pieper and D. Wieser (Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Peter Lang, 2012), 53–70.

41. J. Yandell, The Social Construction of Meaning: Reading Literature in Urban English Classrooms (Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2014) ; J. Yandell, “Knowledge, English and the Formation of Teachers,” Pedagogy, Culture and Society 25, no. 4 (2017): 583–599 ; Yandell and Brady, “English and the Politics of Knowledge”;Turvey, Yandell, and Ali, “English as a Site of Cultural Negotiation and Creative Contestation”;and A. Turvey and J. Lloyd, “Great Expectations and the Complexities of Teacher Development,” English in Education 48, no. 1 (2014): 76–92 .

42. See J. Yandall, B. Doecke, and Z. Abdi (2020), “Who me? Hailing Individuals as Subjects: Standardised Literacy Testing as an Instrument of Neo-Liberal Ideology,” in The sociopolitics of English language testing , ed. S. A. Mirhosseini and P. De Costa. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.

43. Barnes, From Communication to Curriculum , 14.

44. Barnes, From Communication to Curriculum , 14.

45. See Barnes, Becoming an English Teacher , 47; Barnes’s vision of culture as inhering “in the interpersonal and social interaction” of the classroom is akin to Raymond Williams’s vision of “culture as ordinary,” which was likewise enunciated in reaction to Leavis’s understanding of culture. See Doecke, et al. (2014) for a comparison of Barnes and Williams.

46. See S. Ball, A. Kenny, and D. Gardiner, “Literacy, Politics and the Teaching of English,” in Bringing English to Order: The History and Politics of a School Subject , ed. I. Goodson and P. Medway (London, UK: Falmer Press, 1990), 59 .

47. Ball, Kenny, and Gardiner, “Literacy, Politics and the Teaching of English,” 59.

48. See P. Medway et al., English Teachers in a Postwar Democracy: Emerging Choice in London Schools 1945–1965 (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014) .

49. See J. Yandell and M. Brady, “English and the Politics of Knowledge,” English in Education 50, no. 1 (2016): 44–59 .

50. An interesting attempt to reconceptualize English teaching outside national boundaries can be found in Russell West-Pavlov’s “The Multicultural and Multilingual Classroom as a Provocation for German EFL Teaching,” written in response to the refugee crisis and the growth of multiculturalism in Germany and discusses the role that teaching English as a foreign language might play in enabling people to move beyond Eurocentric models of language and culture (see West-Pavlov’s “The Multicultural and Multilingual Classroom as a Provocation for German EFL Teaching”).

51. D. Smith, Institutional Ethnography: A Sociology for People (Lanham, MD: Altamira Press, 2005) ; and Smith, Institutional Ethnography , 21.

52. B. Corcoran, M. Hayhoe, and G. M. Pradl, Knowledge in the Making: Challenging the Text in the Classroom (Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 1994) ; R. Exton, “The Post-Structuralist Always Reads Twice,” The English and Media Magazine 10 (1982): 13–19 ; and N. Peim, Critical Theory and the English Teacher: Transforming the Subject (London, UK: Routledge, 1993) .

53. See O’Neill Mellor and A. Patterson, Reading Stories (Scarborough, WA, 1987), 32 .

54. C. Belsey, Critical Practice (London, UK: Methuen, 1980), 7 (italics in original).

55. A. Patterson, “Individualism in English: From Personal Growth to Discursive Construction,” English Education 24, no. 3 (October 1992): 131–146 .

56. Jack Thomson, Understanding Teenagers’ Reading: Reading Processes and the Teaching of Literature (Norwood: Australian Association for the Teaching of English, 1987), 360.

57. Thomson, Understanding Teenagers’ Reading , 224.

58. Doecke, “Lost (and Found) in Translation.”

59. Terry Eagleton, Literary Theory: An Introduction (Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell, 1983), 196–197 .

60. Eagleton, Literary Theory , 34.

61. Eagleton, T. (2013), How to Read Literature (New Haven and London: Yale University Press), 2 .

62. Roland Barthes, “From Work to Text,” in Textual Strategies: Perspectives in Post-Structuralist Criticism , ed. J. V. Harari (Ithaca, NY: Cornell U. Press, 1981), 73–81 .

63. S. During, Exit Capitalism: Literary Culture, Theory, and Post-Secular Modernity (London, UK, and New York, NY: Routledge, 2010), 3 .

64. G. C. Spivak, Outside in the Teaching Machine (New York, NY, and London, UK: Routledge, 2009), 261.

65. Spivak, Outside in the Teaching Machine .

66. Spivak, Outside in the Teaching Machine , 261.

67. Walter Benjamin, “One Way Street,” in Selected Writings, 1913–1926 , ed. M. Bullock and M. W. Jennings. Vol. 1 (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2004), 449–450.

68. Walter Benjamin, Understanding Brecht . Translated by A. Bostok. Introduced by S. Mitchell (London, UK: Verso, 1973), 97 .

69. Hannah Arendt, “The Crisis in Education,” in Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought (New York, NY: The Viking Press, 1976) .

70. Larrosa, J. “Herod, the Ogre . . . and Miss Cooper’s Rifle: Education as a Refuge for Childhood and the World,” in What is Education? ed. A. J. Bartlett and J. Clemens (Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press, 2017), 153–184 .

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Literature. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 26 April 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|185.194.105.172]
• 185.194.105.172

Character limit 500 /500

The Value of Literature in the Classroom: An Internal View

• Share article

My weekend has been devoted to grading vocabulary tests, creative writing assignments, and essays. There are stacks of student work covering my desk—an old kitchen table that fits perfectly in the bay window at the north end of our house. I have a view of neighborhood cats scratching at the jacaranda tree in the front yard, and of neighbors living their lives on roller skates, bikes, skateboards. Sometimes the stacks of papers feel like force fields preventing me from entering the outside world. Inside, grading serves as a way to confront myself as a teacher in private.

My husband laughs over my tendency to talk to my students while I grade. He reports what I’ve said: “Support your opinion.” “You’re brilliant here, but what do you have against paragraphs?” “What the heck were you thinking?” When time permits, I like to check my comments on their papers—will they be able to tell if I was frustrated with my own children that day? Was I too sarcastic? Did I spill any wine on that final stack?

I admit that while I completely understand the importance of grading and of giving feedback on written assignments, it is the aspect of teaching that makes me most uncomfortable. Students can’t answer back—we can’t truly engage about the given topic and I am essentially giving a final word. Ideally, my red or green or purple ink, depending on the day, will be legible and will convey that I know that they are more than this assignment, this misspelled word. Honesty can only be employed so much. I never use words like “gossamer"—but I should, because it’s a really pretty word. How many 16-year-olds are going to understand that sentiment? Not every student loves English.

There is a debate on the kind of work I do as an English teacher that is slowly being articulated into school policies—it rears its head more and more in department meetings and conferences these days. The premise is, “Why do they need to learn this? We’re not making them into English majors.” Such a notion is a bright blue paint ball aimed and fired onto curriculum such as Shakespeare, or Swift, Plath, Thoreau—you name it. I feel much more equipped to answer this challenge with my students—they are still dreamers, even if slightly jaded. I can say, “Literature might instruct you how to handle heartbreak.” “This reading doesn’t shy away from the ugly parts of humanity.” “This passage has a lot of sex in it.” “This essay gave South Park a future on your television” —and they will perk up and give selected texts a chance.

What happens in policymakers’ lives that makes them challenge the relevance of the human experience in literature? I assume that the adults questioning the merit of spending time immersed in literature, which is in their view “dated” or “meaningless,” were somehow deeply failed on their academic journeys. I know it’s not my job to connect the dots for my students, but I’m a believer in giving them the framework to make the discovery that Shakespeare cared about what they care about.

Innovation and Imagination

Maybe it’s the “information age.” The pace of our lives fools us into being plugged into the trivial things. Still, aren’t some of my Facebook friends as fictitious as the characters I care most about in various stories? My entire 4th grade year was spent seeking out a friend who looked and behaved like Judy Blume’s Sheila the Great . Or, perhaps I’m just silly and overthinking it. Perhaps we don’t have time to model how to savor and dwell on classic or contemporary literature because, come on, it’s not all going to be on the test. The greatest amount of funding is rewarded to math and science-based pursuits because our country isn’t performing as well as others in these areas. Leaders assert the need for innovation. Am I naïve in my belief that innovation requires imagination? Viewing literature as a means to effectively follow instructions on an IKEA box deprives our county’s children of the joy of reading for joy.

Literature and the arts in general create pathways to discovering personal vision—to imagine a world that values one’s creativity. Imagination informs innovation. In any case, it’s Saturday. The world cycles outside my window while I review comments on papers to be sure the right messages bleed through.

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 1: Introduction

Learning objectives.

At the conclusion of this chapter, you will be able to:

• Identify the purpose of the literature review in  the research process
• Distinguish between different types of literature reviews

1.1 What is a Literature Review?

Pick up nearly any book on research methods and you will find a description of a literature review.  At a basic level, the term implies a survey of factual or nonfiction books, articles, and other documents published on a particular subject.  Definitions may be similar across the disciplines, with new types and definitions continuing to emerge.  Generally speaking, a literature review is a:

• “comprehensive background of the literature within the interested topic area…” ( O’Gorman & MacIntosh, 2015, p. 31 ).
• “critical component of the research process that provides an in-depth analysis of recently published research findings in specifically identified areas of interest.” ( House, 2018, p. 109 ).
• “written document that presents a logically argued case founded on a comprehensive understanding of the current state of knowledge about a topic of study” ( Machi & McEvoy,  2012, p. 4 ).

As a foundation for knowledge advancement in every discipline, it is an important element of any research project.  At the graduate or doctoral level, the literature review is an essential feature of thesis and dissertation, as well as grant proposal writing.  That is to say, “A substantive, thorough, sophisticated literature review is a precondition for doing substantive, thorough, sophisticated research…A researcher cannot perform significant research without first understanding the literature in the field.” ( Boote & Beile, 2005, p. 3 ).  It is by this means, that a researcher demonstrates familiarity with a body of knowledge and thereby establishes credibility with a reader.  An advanced-level literature review shows how prior research is linked to a new project, summarizing and synthesizing what is known while identifying gaps in the knowledge base, facilitating theory development, closing areas where enough research already exists, and uncovering areas where more research is needed. ( Webster & Watson, 2002, p. xiii )

A graduate-level literature review is a compilation of the most significant previously published research on your topic. Unlike an annotated bibliography or a research paper you may have written as an undergraduate, your literature review will outline, evaluate and synthesize relevant research and relate those sources to your own thesis or research question. It is much more than a summary of all the related literature.

It is a type of writing that demonstrate the importance of your research by defining the main ideas and the relationship between them. A good literature review lays the foundation for the importance of your stated problem and research question.

Literature reviews:

• define a concept
• map the research terrain or scope
• systemize relationships between concepts
• identify gaps in the literature ( Rocco & Plathotnik, 2009, p. 128 )

The purpose of a literature review is to demonstrate that your research question  is meaningful. Additionally, you may review the literature of different disciplines to find deeper meaning and understanding of your topic. It is especially important to consider other disciplines when you do not find much on your topic in one discipline. You will need to search the cognate literature before claiming there is “little previous research” on your topic.

Well developed literature reviews involve numerous steps and activities. The literature review is an iterative process because you will do at least two of them: a preliminary search to learn what has been published in your area and whether there is sufficient support in the literature for moving ahead with your subject. After this first exploration, you will conduct a deeper dive into the literature to learn everything you can about the topic and its related issues.

Literature Review Tutorial

1.2 Literature Review Basics

An effective literature review must:

• Methodologically analyze and synthesize quality literature on a topic
• Provide a firm foundation to a topic or research area
• Provide a firm foundation for the selection of a research methodology
• Demonstrate that the proposed research contributes something new to the overall body of knowledge of advances the research field’s knowledge base. ( Levy & Ellis, 2006 ).

All literature reviews, whether they are qualitative, quantitative or both, will at some point:

• Introduce the topic and define its key terms
• Establish the importance of the topic
• Provide an overview of the amount of available literature and its types (for example: theoretical, statistical, speculative)
• Identify gaps in the literature
• Point out consistent finding across studies
• Arrive at a synthesis that organizes what is known about a topic
• Discusses possible implications and directions for future research

1.3 Types of Literature Reviews

There are many different types of literature reviews, however there are some shared characteristics or features.  Remember a comprehensive literature review is, at its most fundamental level, an original work based on an extensive critical examination and synthesis of the relevant literature on a topic. As a study of the research on a particular topic, it is arranged by key themes or findings, which may lead up to or link to the  research question.  In some cases, the research question will drive the type of literature review that is undertaken.

The following section includes brief descriptions of the terms used to describe different literature review types with examples of each.   The included citations are open access, Creative Commons licensed or copyright-restricted.

1.3.1 Types of Review

1.3.1.1 conceptual.

Guided by an understanding of basic issues rather than a research methodology. You are looking for key factors, concepts or variables and the presumed relationship between them. The goal of the conceptual literature review is to categorize and describe concepts relevant to your study or topic and outline a relationship between them. You will include relevant theory and empirical research.

Examples of a Conceptual Review:

• Education : The formality of learning science in everyday life: A conceptual literature review. ( Dohn, 2010 ).
• Education : Are we asking the right questions? A conceptual review of the educational development literature in higher education. ( Amundsen & Wilson, 2012 ).

1.3.1.2 Empirical

An empirical literature review collects, creates, arranges, and analyzes numeric data reflecting the frequency of themes, topics, authors and/or methods found in existing literature. Empirical literature reviews present their summaries in quantifiable terms using descriptive and inferential statistics.

Examples of an Empirical Review:

• Nursing : False-positive findings in Cochrane meta-analyses with and without application of trial sequential analysis: An empirical review. ( Imberger, Thorlund, Gluud, & Wettersley, 2016 ).
• Education : Impediments of e-learning adoption in higher learning institutions of Tanzania: An empirical review ( Mwakyusa & Mwalyagile, 2016 ).

1.3.1.3 Exploratory

Unlike a synoptic literature review, the purpose here is to provide a broad approach to the topic area. The aim is breadth rather than depth and to get a general feel for the size of the topic area. A graduate student might do an exploratory review of the literature before beginning a synoptic, or more comprehensive one.

Examples of an Exploratory Review:

• Education : University research management: An exploratory literature review. ( Schuetzenmeister, 2010 ).
• Education : An exploratory review of design principles in constructivist gaming learning environments. ( Rosario & Widmeyer, 2009 ).

1.3.1.4 Focused

A type of literature review limited to a single aspect of previous research, such as methodology. A focused literature review generally will describe the implications of choosing a particular element of past research, such as methodology in terms of data collection, analysis and interpretation.

Examples of a Focused Review:

• Nursing : Clinical inertia in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus: A focused literature review. ( Khunti, Davies, & Khunti, 2015 ).
• Education : Language awareness: Genre awareness-a focused review of the literature. ( Stainton, 1992 ).

1.3.1.5 Integrative

Critiques past research and draws overall conclusions from the body of literature at a specified point in time. Reviews, critiques, and synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an integrated way. Most integrative reviews are intended to address mature topics or  emerging topics. May require the author to adopt a guiding theory, a set of competing models, or a point of view about a topic.  For more description of integrative reviews, see Whittemore & Knafl (2005).

Examples of an Integrative Review:

• Nursing : Interprofessional teamwork and collaboration between community health workers and healthcare teams: An integrative review. ( Franklin,  Bernhardt, Lopez, Long-Middleton, & Davis, 2015 ).
• Education : Exploring the gap between teacher certification and permanent employment in Ontario: An integrative literature review. ( Brock & Ryan, 2016 ).

1.3.1.6 Meta-analysis

A subset of a  systematic review, that takes findings from several studies on the same subject and analyzes them using standardized statistical procedures to pool together data. Integrates findings from a large body of quantitative findings to enhance understanding, draw conclusions, and detect patterns and relationships. Gather data from many different, independent studies that look at the same research question and assess similar outcome measures. Data is combined and re-analyzed, providing a greater statistical power than any single study alone. It’s important to note that not every systematic review includes a meta-analysis but a meta-analysis can’t exist without a systematic review of the literature.

Examples of a Meta-Analysis:

• Education : Efficacy of the cooperative learning method on mathematics achievement and attitude: A meta-analysis research. ( Capar & Tarim, 2015 ).
• Nursing : A meta-analysis of the effects of non-traditional teaching methods on the critical thinking abilities of nursing students. ( Lee, Lee, Gong, Bae, & Choi, 2016 ).
• Education : Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: A meta-analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1991. ( Weinburgh, 1995 ).

1.3.1.7 Narrative/Traditional

An overview of research on a particular topic that critiques and summarizes a body of literature. Typically broad in focus. Relevant past research is selected and synthesized into a coherent discussion. Methodologies, findings and limits of the existing body of knowledge are discussed in narrative form. Sometimes also referred to as a traditional literature review. Requires a sufficiently focused research question. The process may be subject to bias that supports the researcher’s own work.

Examples of a Narrative/Traditional Review:

• Nursing : Family carers providing support to a person dying in the home setting: A narrative literature review. ( Morris, King, Turner, & Payne, 2015 ).
• Education : Adventure education and Outward Bound: Out-of-class experiences that make a lasting difference. ( Hattie, Marsh, Neill, & Richards, 1997 ).
• Education : Good quality discussion is necessary but not sufficient in asynchronous tuition: A brief narrative review of the literature. ( Fear & Erikson-Brown, 2014 ).
• Nursing : Outcomes of physician job satisfaction: A narrative review, implications, and directions for future research. ( Williams & Skinner, 2003 ).

1.3.1.8 Realist

Aspecific type of literature review that is theory-driven and interpretative and is intended to explain the outcomes of a complex intervention program(s).

Examples of a Realist Review:

• Nursing : Lean thinking in healthcare: A realist review of the literature. ( Mazzacato, Savage, Brommels, 2010 ).
• Education : Unravelling quality culture in higher education: A realist review. ( Bendermacher, Egbrink, Wolfhagen, & Dolmans, 2017 ).

1.3.1.9 Scoping

Tend to be non-systematic and focus on breadth of coverage conducted on a topic rather than depth. Utilize a wide range of materials; may not evaluate the quality of the studies as much as count the number. One means of understanding existing literature. Aims to identify nature and extent of research; preliminary assessment of size and scope of available research on topic. May include research in progress.

Examples of a Scoping Review:

• Nursing : Organizational interventions improving access to community-based primary health care for vulnerable populations: A scoping review. ( Khanassov, Pluye, Descoteaux, Haggerty,  Russell, Gunn, & Levesque, 2016 ).
• Education : Interdisciplinary doctoral research supervision: A scoping review. ( Vanstone, Hibbert, Kinsella, McKenzie, Pitman, & Lingard, 2013 ).
• Nursing : A scoping review of the literature on the abolition of user fees in health care services in Africa. ( Ridde, & Morestin, 2011 ).

1.3.1.10 Synoptic

Unlike an exploratory review, the purpose is to provide a concise but accurate overview of all material that appears to be relevant to a chosen topic. Both content and methodological material is included. The review should aim to be both descriptive and evaluative. Summarizes previous studies while also showing how the body of literature could be extended and improved in terms of content and method by identifying gaps.

Examples of a Synoptic Review:

• Education : Theoretical framework for educational assessment: A synoptic review. ( Ghaicha, 2016 ).
• Education : School effects research: A synoptic review of past efforts and some suggestions for the future. ( Cuttance, 1981 ).

1.3.1.11 Systematic Review

A rigorous review that follows a strict methodology designed with a presupposed selection of literature reviewed.  Undertaken to clarify the state of existing research, the evidence, and possible implications that can be drawn from that.  Using comprehensive and exhaustive searching of the published and unpublished literature, searching various databases, reports, and grey literature.  Transparent and reproducible in reporting details of time frame, search and methods to minimize bias.  Must include a team of at least 2-3 and includes the critical appraisal of the literature.  For more description of systematic reviews, including links to protocols, checklists, workflow processes, and structure see “ A Young Researcher’s Guide to a Systematic Review “.

Examples of a Systematic Review:

• Education : The potentials of using cloud computing in schools: A systematic literature review ( Hartmann, Braae, Pedersen, & Khalid, 2017 )
• Nursing : Is butter back? A systematic review and meta-analysis of butter consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and total mortality. ( Pimpin, Wu, Haskelberg, Del Gobbo, & Mozaffarian, 2016 ).
• Education : The use of research to improve professional practice: a systematic review of the literature. ( Hemsley-Brown & Sharp, 2003 ).
• Nursing : Using computers to self-manage type 2 diabetes. ( Pal, Eastwood, Michie, Farmer, Barnard, Peacock, Wood, Inniss, & Murray, 2013 ).

1.3.1.12 Umbrella/Overview of Reviews

Compiles evidence from multiple systematic reviews into one document. Focuses on broad condition or problem for which there are competing interventions and highlights reviews that address those interventions and their effects. Often used in recommendations for practice.

Examples of an Umbrella/Overview Review:

• Education : Reflective practice in healthcare education: An umbrella review. ( Fragknos, 2016 ).
• Nursing : Systematic reviews of psychosocial interventions for autism: an umbrella review. ( Seida, Ospina, Karkhaneh, Hartling, Smith, & Clark, 2009 ).

For a brief discussion see “ Not all literature reviews are the same ” (Thomson, 2013).

1.4 Why do a Literature Review?

The purpose of the literature review is the same regardless of the topic or research method. It tests your own research question against what is already known about the subject.

1.4.1 First – It’s part of the whole. Omission of a literature review chapter or section in a graduate-level project represents a serious void or absence of critical element in the research process.

The outcome of your review is expected to demonstrate that you:

• can systematically explore the research in your topic area
• can read and critically analyze the literature in your discipline and then use it appropriately to advance your own work
• have sufficient knowledge in the topic to undertake further investigation

1.4.2 Second – It’s good for you!

• You improve your skills as a researcher
• You become familiar with the discourse of your discipline and learn how to be a scholar in your field
• You learn through writing your ideas and finding your voice in your subject area
• You define, redefine and clarify your research question for yourself in the process

1.4.3 Third – It’s good for your reader. Your reader expects you to have done the hard work of gathering, evaluating and synthesizes the literature.  When you do a literature review you:

• Set the context for the topic and present its significance
• Identify what’s important to know about your topic – including individual material, prior research, publications, organizations and authors.
• Demonstrate relationships among prior research
• Establish limitations of existing knowledge
• Analyze trends in the topic’s treatment and gaps in the literature

1.4.4 Why do a literature review?

• To locate gaps in the literature of your discipline
• To avoid reinventing the wheel
• To carry on where others have already been
• To identify other people working in the same field
• To increase your breadth of knowledge in your subject area
• To find the seminal works in your field
• To provide intellectual context for your own work
• To acknowledge opposing viewpoints
• To put your work in perspective
• To demonstrate you can discover and retrieve previous work in the area

1.5 Common Literature Review Errors

Graduate-level literature reviews are more than a summary of the publications you find on a topic.  As you have seen in this brief introduction, literature reviews are a very specific type of research, analysis, and writing.  We will explore these topics more in the next chapters.  Some things to keep in mind as you begin your own research and writing are ways to avoid the most common errors seen in the first attempt at a literature review.  For a quick review of some of the pitfalls and challenges a new researcher faces when he/she begins work, see “ Get Ready: Academic Writing, General Pitfalls and (oh yes) Getting Started! ”.

As you begin your own graduate-level literature review, try to avoid these common mistakes:

• Accepts another researcher’s finding as valid without evaluating methodology and data
• Contrary findings and alternative interpretations are not considered or mentioned
• Findings are not clearly related to one’s own study, or findings are too general
• Insufficient time allowed to define best search strategies and writing
• Isolated statistical results are simply reported rather than synthesizing the results
• Problems with selecting and using most relevant keywords, subject headings and descriptors
• Relies too heavily on secondary sources
• Search methods are not recorded or reported for transparency
• Summarizes rather than synthesizes articles

In conclusion, the purpose of a literature review is three-fold:

• to survey the current state of knowledge or evidence in the area of inquiry,
• to identify key authors, articles, theories, and findings in that area, and
• to identify gaps in knowledge in that research area.

A literature review is commonly done today using computerized keyword searches in online databases, often working with a trained librarian or information expert. Keywords can be combined using the Boolean operators, “and”, “or” and sometimes “not”  to narrow down or expand the search results. Once a list of articles is generated from the keyword and subject heading search, the researcher must then manually browse through each title and abstract, to determine the suitability of that article before a full-text article is obtained for the research question.

Literature reviews should be reasonably complete, and not restricted to a few journals, a few years, or a specific methodology or research design. Reviewed articles may be summarized in the form of tables, and can be further structured using organizing frameworks such as a concept matrix.

A well-conducted literature review should indicate whether the initial research questions have already been addressed in the literature, whether there are newer or more interesting research questions available, and whether the original research questions should be modified or changed in light of findings of the literature review.

The review can also provide some intuitions or potential answers to the questions of interest and/or help identify theories that have previously been used to address similar questions and may provide evidence to inform policy or decision-making. ( Bhattacherjee, 2012 ).

Read Abstract 1.  Refer to Types of Literature Reviews.  What type of literature review do you think this study is and why?  See the Answer Key for the correct response.

Nursing : To describe evidence of international literature on the safe care of the hospitalised child after the World Alliance for Patient Safety and list contributions of the general theoretical framework of patient safety for paediatric nursing.

An integrative literature review between 2004 and 2015 using the databases PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Scopus, Web of Science and Wiley Online Library, and the descriptors Safety or Patient safety, Hospitalised child, Paediatric nursing, and Nursing care.

Thirty-two articles were analysed, most of which were from North American, with a descriptive approach. The quality of the recorded information in the medical records, the use of checklists, and the training of health workers contribute to safe care in paediatric nursing and improve the medication process and partnerships with parents.

General information available on patient safety should be incorporated in paediatric nursing care. ( Wegner, Silva, Peres, Bandeira, Frantz, Botene, & Predebon, 2017 ).

Read Abstract 2.  Refer to Types of Literature Reviews.  What type of lit review do you think this study is and why?  See the Answer Key for the correct response.

Education : The focus of this paper centers around timing associated with early childhood education programs and interventions using meta-analytic methods. At any given assessment age, a child’s current age equals starting age, plus duration of program, plus years since program ended. Variability in assessment ages across the studies should enable everyone to identify the separate effects of all three time-related components. The project is a meta-analysis of evaluation studies of early childhood education programs conducted in the United States and its territories between 1960 and 2007. The population of interest is children enrolled in early childhood education programs between the ages of 0 and 5 and their control-group counterparts. Since the data come from a meta-analysis, the population for this study is drawn from many different studies with diverse samples. Given the preliminary nature of their analysis, the authors cannot offer conclusions at this point. ( Duncan, Leak, Li, Magnuson, Schindler, & Yoshikawa, 2011 ).

Test Yourself

See Answer Key for the correct responses.

The purpose of a graduate-level literature review is to summarize in as many words as possible everything that is known about my topic.

A literature review is significant because in the process of doing one, the researcher learns to read and critically assess the literature of a discipline and then uses it appropriately to advance his/her own research.

Read the following abstract and choose the correct type of literature review it represents.

Nursing: E-cigarette use has become increasingly popular, especially among the young. Its long-term influence upon health is unknown. Aim of this review has been to present the current state of knowledge about the impact of e-cigarette use on health, with an emphasis on Central and Eastern Europe. During the preparation of this narrative review, the literature on e-cigarettes available within the network PubMed was retrieved and examined. In the final review, 64 research papers were included. We specifically assessed the construction and operation of the e-cigarette as well as the chemical composition of the e-liquid; the impact that vapor arising from the use of e-cigarette explored in experimental models in vitro; and short-term effects of use of e-cigarettes on users’ health. Among the substances inhaled by the e-smoker, there are several harmful products, such as: formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acroleine, propanal, nicotine, acetone, o-methyl-benzaldehyde, carcinogenic nitrosamines. Results from experimental animal studies indicate the negative impact of e-cigarette exposure on test models, such as ascytotoxicity, oxidative stress, inflammation, airway hyper reactivity, airway remodeling, mucin production, apoptosis, and emphysematous changes. The short-term impact of e-cigarettes on human health has been studied mostly in experimental setting. Available evidence shows that the use of e-cigarettes may result in acute lung function responses (e.g., increase in impedance, peripheral airway flow resistance) and induce oxidative stress. Based on the current available evidence, e-cigarette use is associated with harmful biologic responses, although it may be less harmful than traditional cigarettes. (J ankowski, Brożek, Lawson, Skoczyński, & Zejda, 2017 ).

• Meta-analysis
• Exploratory

Education: In this review, Mary Vorsino writes that she is interested in keeping the potential influences of women pragmatists of Dewey’s day in mind while presenting modern feminist re readings of Dewey. She wishes to construct a narrowly-focused and succinct literature review of thinkers who have donned a feminist lens to analyze Dewey’s approaches to education, learning, and democracy and to employ Dewey’s works in theorizing on gender and education and on gender in society. This article first explores Dewey as both an ally and a problematic figure in feminist literature and then investigates the broader sphere of feminist pragmatism and two central themes within it: (1) valuing diversity, and diverse experiences; and (2) problematizing fixed truths. ( Vorsino, 2015 ).

Image Attributions

Literature Reviews for Education and Nursing Graduate Students Copyright © by Linda Frederiksen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Gyeonggi-do Institute for Global Education

Gateway to the world, literature-based learning and instruction: the basics.

The concept of using literature in education is perhaps one of the oldest pedagogical frameworks, but the resurgence of literature-based instruction in the classroom, especially in the language classroom, has brought new life to the age-old approach. Literature-based instruction in the language classroom focuses more on the communicative needs of language learners and moves away from the more “literary” aspects of literature study such as critical lenses and stylistic analysis. Let’s look at the who, what, why, and how of integrating this “new” form of literature-based learning into the language classroom.

Who is LBL for?

            Because of the necessity for discussion and a deeper understanding of the text, literature-based learning works best in secondary classrooms.  Learners with lower proficiency may also find the activities related to literature-based learning frustrating as they may not have the vocabulary or grammatical knowledge to accurately express their opinion and personal connections to the material in L2.

What is LBL?

Literature-based learning, in essence, is when an educator uses literature as the basis for instruction. The core content for the entirety of the curriculum comes from the reading material, however additional texts may be used to complement the literature.

The types of activities used in literature-based instruction are what is natural do to after reading. After reading, one often discusses the plot or shares their personal connection or opinions to the themes represented in the material. However, a 10 question comprehension quiz is not an activity naturally done after reading, outside of the classroom.

In Literature-based instruction, learners choose their own high-interest piece for extensive reading. There should be a variety of options for students to choose from in varying reading levels. Many educators choose to incorporate themes into their LBL curriculum, thus offering book choices to students that all fall under that central theme (Khatib & Nourzadeh, 2011).

Students are given the opportunity to then discuss the reading with peers and complete tasks related to the reading material (Sidhu, Chan, and Kaur, 2010).

Why use LBL?

Using lbi promotes learner’s…..

• Vocabulary Knowledge (Frantzen, 2002)
• Grammatical Knowledge (Tayebipour, 2009)
• Knowledge of L2 lexical phrases and fixed expressions (MacKenzie, 1999)
• Language Awareness (Chan, 1999)
• Sociolinguistic and pragmatic competences (McKay, 2001)

Using authentic literature texts (unaltered and unabridged) provides opportunities for learners to interact with original expressions and natural vocabulary (Puspitasari, 2016).

Literature also helps learners to develop affective skills (Violetta-Irene, 2015), and cultural knowledge.

Studies have proven that learners tend to enjoy learning through literature-based instruction, especially when given a choice of reading material (Piscayanti, 2010; Darmawati et al., 2020). Learners have also been proven to achieve better language acquisition results when learning through literature-based instruction (Piscayanti, 2010).

How to implement LBL?

As stated, learners should be given a choice of literature text at an appropriate reading level and (if applicable) within the central theme of the unit.

The teacher can then engage with the students in several ways including pre-reading activities, during reading literature circles and discussion groups, and after-reading deliverables such as cooperative tasks and projects.

The central focus should be on language acquisition and personifying the general themes present in the literature. Students should be given ample opportunities to share their opinions and engage with the text in creative ways.

For a full list of references on this post, click here .

Betsey Norman

Share this:

Leave a reply cancel reply, discover more from gyeonggi-do institute for global education.

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

• Our Mission

4 Tips for Dealing With the Challenges of Teaching Diverse Texts

Teachers can help students ask tough questions and engage in respectful dialogue as they process a diversity of texts.

Culturally responsive teaching is an integral measure by which we evaluate a high-quality curriculum. Our multiethnic, multiracial student population deserves to see themselves reflected in what they are being asked to read. However, engaging in culturally responsive teaching and analyzing texts by diverse authors pose their own sets of challenges.

I recall feeling anxious about guiding students through a study of Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale . I was unsure whether I could adequately navigate the conversations about its sensitive topics such as gender power dynamics, abuse, and the oppression of women. Nevertheless, the stumbling blocks of that experience represented a decisive turning point in how I began to tackle demanding, diverse texts in my classroom. Here are strategies I use to help teach diverse texts in a culturally responsive way.

4 Best Practices for Culturally Responsive Teaching of Diverse Texts

1. Begin with themes, rather than texts. Telling yourself “I want my students to be exposed to more Black female writers” can get even the most well-intentioned teacher into a difficult situation. Instead, begin with the question, “What do I want my students to understand on a deeper level?”

For example, you may want your students to explore the complex, symbiotic relationship between humans and nature. You could assign the novel Parable of the Sower , by Octavia Butler; the poem “I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud,” by William Wordsworth; and the short story “The Bass, the River, and Sheila Mant,” by W.D. Wetherell. In each text, characters undergo a journey through nature but have vastly different experiences. Structuring thematic units in this way ensures that students are exposed to various genres, perspectives, and historical contexts.

Additionally, providing students with a reading log where they respond to the same question during and after reading each text facilitates some of the highest forms of critical thinking.

For instance, one continuous reflection question could be, “What do the characters gain from their natural surroundings?” Students might notice that the characters in the novel use the limited resources (acorns) to produce food (bread), while the protagonist in the story relies on the river to help him travel quickly and impress his love interest; furthermore, the speaker of the poem finds solace and tranquility while walking among the field of daffodils.

Slowly, organically, and perhaps even unconsciously, students begin to compare and contrast perspectives and synthesize ideas across various sources to support their claims—long before any formal writing task is assigned.

2. Give students a voice, and let them ask the tough questions. Creating a culturally responsive classroom empowers students to become the owners of their learning and trains them not only to use their voice to ask challenging questions, but also to practice answering them. This is particularly important when studying diverse texts because historically absent authors tend to undertake weighty, sensitive topics that challenge the status quo.

Of course, students need question frames to help them get started: 

• How is ____ in text A similar to/different from ____ in text B? 
• How would the author of text B feel about the idea that ____, which is presented in text C? 

After students practice and internalize these frames, they slowly realize that strong questioning cannot have a simple yes/no answer. At this point, they are able to interrogate the text at hand, their peers, and their teacher on a deeper level, which is how you truly foster an appreciation for any writer. 

My students’ favorite part of the unit is always Socratic Seminar day, which comes after we have thoroughly read and analyzed three or four texts around one thematic topic. On Socratic Seminar day, they ask the questions. They provide the answers. They facilitate the discussion. In short, they do all the work and the thinking while I am a mere shadow in the room. 

These techniques encourage students to engage in academic discourse as a way of learning how to (politely) defend their own opinions when challenged. For humanities teachers, coaching our students to partake in respectful discourse is one of the most valuable skills we can help cultivate. This is the embodiment of a culturally responsive approach to education.

3. Do not pretend to have the answers. One of my favorite stories to assign high school students is “The Flowers,” by Alice Walker. It’s so short yet so rich, so beautiful yet tragic, and so simple yet layered with symbolism. But I am up front with my students: I’m unsure of what Alice Walker is trying to say about childhood and innocence. Is it better to lose it fairly quickly in preparation for a cruel world, or should one protect it at all costs?

This is a formidable philosophical question, and asking it forces me to become vulnerable with my students. But guess what: My students are capable of providing answers—all unique, all anchored in their personal understanding, and all valid. A culturally responsive classroom prioritizes reflection and introspection over correct answers.

4. Don’t make assumptions about your students’ experiences. It’s great to assign Julia Alvarez because you want your Latino students to see themselves “represented,” but don’t expect these students to be experts on the same experiences she writes about. When we make assumptions about others, we tend to default into stereotypes and cringeworthy generalizations.

This sounds obvious, but you would not believe how many times I, Mexican-born and raised in Texas, was asked to explain a random cultural reference in In the Time of the Butterflies , even though I had never set foot in the Dominican Republic. It wasn’t until I was well into my 30s that I finally visited the Caribbean and had any background about the dictator Rafael Trujillo.

While some students might be extroverted enough to share cultural insights with the rest of their peers, not all will be. If you encounter an unfamiliar concept while guiding your students’ reading, asking, “What do we think Alvarez means by ____” is a simple way to avoid forcing a student into taking the daunting responsibility of speaking on behalf of an entire race or ethnic group. We should be cautious about how we ask students to discuss and deconstruct literary texts, particularly when the texts represent voices of those historically underrepresented or marginalized.

If you are asking yourself, “Am I the right teacher to teach this?” it probably means that you are. A little apprehension is good, but you must have a plan, a clear understanding of why (and how) you want your students to interact with that text, and structures in place to ensure that the students are truly engaging with its ideas.

• Library databases
• Library website

Education Literature Review: Education Literature Review

What does this guide cover.

Writing the literature review is a long, complex process that requires you to use many different tools, resources, and skills.

This page provides links to the guides, tutorials, and webinars that can help you with all aspects of completing your literature review.

The Basic Process

These resources provide overviews of the entire literature review process. Start here if you are new to the literature review process.

• Literature Reviews Overview : Writing Center
• How to do a Literature Review : Library
• Video: Common Errors Made When Conducting a Lit Review (YouTube)  

The Role of the Literature Review

Your literature review gives your readers an understanding of the evolution of scholarly research on your topic.

In your literature review you will:

• survey the scholarly landscape
• provide a synthesis of the issues, trends, and concepts
• possibly provide some historical background

Review the literature in two ways:

• Section 1: reviews the literature for the Problem
• Section 3: reviews the literature for the Project

The literature review is NOT an annotated bibliography. Nor should it simply summarize the articles you've read. Literature reviews are organized thematically and demonstrate synthesis of the literature.

For more information, view the Library's short video on searching by themes:

Short Video: Research for the Literature Review

(4 min 10 sec) Recorded August 2019 Transcript 

Search for Literature

The iterative process of research:

• Find an article.
• Read the article and build new searches using keywords and names from the article.
• Mine the bibliography for other works.
• Use “cited by” searches to find more recent works that reference the article.
• Repeat steps 2-4 with the new articles you find.

These are the main skills and resources you will need in order to effectively search for literature on your topic:

• Subject Research: Education by Jon Allinder Last Updated Aug 7, 2023 3187 views this year
• Keyword Searching: Finding Articles on Your Topic by Lynn VanLeer Last Updated Sep 12, 2023 16117 views this year
• Google Scholar by Jon Allinder Last Updated Aug 16, 2023 10406 views this year
• Quick Answer: How do I find books and articles that cite an article I already have?
• Quick Answer: How do I find a measurement, test, survey or instrument?

Video: Education Databases and Doctoral Research Resources

(6 min 04 sec) Recorded April 2019 Transcript 

Staying Organized

The literature review requires organizing a variety of information. The following resources will help you develop the organizational systems you'll need to be successful.

• Organize your research
• Citation Management Software

You can make your search log as simple or complex as you would like.  It can be a table in a word document or an excel spread sheet.  Here are two examples.  The word document is a basic table where you can keep track of databases, search terms, limiters, results and comments.  The Excel sheet is more complex and has additional sheets for notes, Google Scholar log; Journal Log, and Questions to ask the Librarian.  

• Search Log Example Sample search log in Excel
• Search Log Example Sample search log set up as a table in a word document.
• Literature Review Matrix with color coding Sample template for organizing and synthesizing your research

Writing the Literature Review

The following resources created by the Writing Center and the Academic Skills Center support the writing process for the dissertation/project study. 

• Critical Reading
• What is Synthesis 
• Walden Templates
• Quick Answer: How do I find Walden EdD (Doctor of Education) studies?
• Quick Answer: How do I find Walden PhD dissertations?

Beyond the Literature Review

The literature review isn't the only portion of a dissertation/project study that requires searching. The following resources can help you identify and utilize a theory, methodology, measurement instruments, or statistics.

• Education Theory by Jon Allinder Last Updated May 1, 2022 375 views this year
• Tests & Measures in Education by Kimberly Burton Last Updated Nov 18, 2021 34 views this year
• Education Statistics by Jon Allinder Last Updated Feb 22, 2022 45 views this year
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services

Books and Articles about the Lit Review

The following articles and books outline the purpose of the literature review and offer advice for successfully completing one.

• Chen, D. T. V., Wang, Y. M., & Lee, W. C. (2016). Challenges confronting beginning researchers in conducting literature reviews. Studies in Continuing Education, 38(1), 47-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2015.1030335 Proposes a framework to conceptualize four types of challenges students face: linguistic, methodological, conceptual, and ontological.
• Randolph, J.J. (2009). A guide to writing the dissertation literature review. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 14(13), 1-13. Provides advice for writing a quantitative or qualitative literature review, by a Walden faculty member.
• Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing integrative literature reviews: Using the past and present to explore the future. Human Resource Development Review, 15(4), 404–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484316671606 This article presents the integrative review of literature as a distinctive form of research that uses existing literature to create new knowledge.
• Wee, B. V., & Banister, D. (2016). How to write a literature review paper?. Transport Reviews, 36(2), 278-288. http://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2015.1065456 Discusses how to write a literature review with a focus on adding value rather and suggests structural and contextual aspects found in outstanding literature reviews.
• Winchester, C. L., & Salji, M. (2016). Writing a literature review. Journal of Clinical Urology, 9(5), 308-312. https://doi.org/10.1177/2051415816650133 Reviews the use of different document types to add structure and enrich your literature review and the skill sets needed in writing the literature review.
• Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2017). Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. Journal of Planning Education and Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17723971 Examines different types of literature reviews and the steps necessary to produce a systematic review in educational research.

• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

The Importance of Literature in Education

English Literature is a crucial part of a child’s education and obligatory in the UK until at least the end of their GCSEs. It allows children to develop a variety of key skills that can be transferred, not only across the rest of the curriculum, but also into adulthood when seeking a job. What’s more, reading books can be a source of entertainment and relaxation, and often provides a topic of conversation. I have teamed up with an independent school in Surrey to explore the importance of literature in education in further detail below.

For younger children, literature is great for helping them learn how to concentrate and sit still for long periods of time, which will benefit them throughout their schooling. It also allows them to develop their creativity and imagination, because they will have to visualise the characters and settings, and they may even start to guess what will happen in the next chapter. Parents who read with their little ones on a regular basis are able to develop a strong bond.

Studying literature allows young people to develop the ability to think critically about different topics, from a range of different theoretical perspectives. Through books, they will learn about various historical events and start to understand a wide range of cultures. Essentially, English Literature will help students understand different experiences from a variety of viewpoints, helping them to become more open-minded and empathetic. It broadens their horizons and allows them to understand the world around them on a deeper level.

English Literature is an essay based subject and writing essays is fantastic for a child’s overall development. It helps them learn how to carry out research, develop a line of argument and find evidence to back it up, and write in a coherent manner, thus improving spelling, grammar. Regular writing essays also helps with general communication skills and they may start to feel more comfortable raising their hand in lessons and contributing to class discussions.

From playgroups, education and English Tutors to events, activities and fun for all the family, you are in the right place!

Systematic Reviews & Literature Reviews

Evidence synthesis: part 1.

This blog post is the first in a series exploring Evidence Synthesis . We’re going to start by looking at two types of evidence synthesis: literature reviews and systemic reviews . To help me with this topic I looked at a number of research guides from other institutions, e.g., Cornell University Libraries.

The Key Differences Between a Literature Review and a Systematic Review

Overall, while both literature reviews and systematic reviews involve reviewing existing research literature, systematic reviews adhere to more rigorous and transparent methods to minimize bias and provide robust evidence to inform decision-making in education and other fields. If you are interested in learning about other evidence synthesis this decision tree created by Cornell Libraries (Robinson, n.d.) is a nice visual introduction.

Along with exploring evidence synthesis I am also interested in generative A.I.   I want to be transparent about how I used A.I. to create the table above. I fed this prompt into ChatGPT:

“ List the differences between a literature review and a systemic review for a graduate student of education “

I wanted to see what it would produce. I reformatted the list into a table so that it would be easier to compare and contrast these two reviews much like the one created by Cornell University Libraries (Kibbee, 2024). I think ChatGPT did a pretty good job. I did have to do quite a bit of editing, and make sure that what was created matched what I already knew. There are things ChatGPT left out, for example time frames, and how many people are needed for a systemic review, but we can revisit that in a later post.

Kibbee, M. (2024, April 10). Libguides: A guide to evidence synthesis: Cornell University Library Evidence Synthesis Service. Cornell University Library. https://guides.library.cornell.edu/evidence-synthesis/intro

• Blog Archive 2009-2018
• Library Hours
• Library Salons
• Library Spaces
• Library Workshops
• Reference Desk Questions

Subscribe to the Bank Street Library Blog

Unlocking Potential: Why is Literature Important in Education?

Table of Contents

Literature plays a vital role in education, offering a multitude of benefits that contribute to the holistic development of learners. From cultivating critical thinking and empathy to enhancing social-emotional skills and promoting reading engagement, literature has a significant impact on education. In this article, we will explore the various ways in which literature is essential in education and why it should be included in educational settings.

Factual data shows that literature is crucial in maximizing the potential of millions of children, particularly in regions with high learning poverty rates like Sub-Saharan Africa. Programs such as EdoBEST in Nigeria have demonstrated the positive impact of literature on learning outcomes, highlighting the value of studying literature in education.

One of the key benefits of literature in education is its ability to improve vocabulary and language skills. Reading exposes learners to a wide range of words and language models, equipping them with the necessary tools to excel in various subjects. Moreover, literature fosters critical thinking by encouraging deep analysis and problem-solving, allowing students to analyze complex ideas and develop their intellectual capabilities.

Literature also plays a significant role in building cultural capital and fostering empathy. Through exposure to diverse literary works, students gain insights into different cultures, traditions, and historical contexts. By connecting with characters and understanding their experiences, readers develop empathy and broaden their perspectives.

Additionally, literature enhances social-emotional skills and nurtures creativity. Engaging with literary texts helps students develop emotional intelligence, empathy, and self-awareness. Moreover, literature sparks imagination and creativity, encouraging students to think outside the box and explore new ideas.

Another important aspect of literature in education is its ability to promote reading engagement and language development. By exposing students to different literary genres, literature creates a love for reading and instills a lifelong passion for learning. The rich vocabulary and language models found in literature contribute to language development and communication skills.

Furthermore, literature builds background knowledge and supports lifelong learning. Through literary texts, students gain a deeper understanding of various topics, historical events, and cultural phenomena. This exposure broadens their knowledge base and instills a love for continuous learning.

Lastly, literature education in prisons has shown remarkable results in reducing recidivism rates. By providing inmates with a sense of purpose, personal growth, and a connection to the world beyond prison walls, literature education plays a crucial role in rehabilitation and successful reintegration into society.

Key Takeaways:

• Literature is essential in education, unlocking opportunities and laying the foundation for future learning.
• Reading literature improves vocabulary, critical thinking, and analytical skills.
• Literature builds cultural capital, fosters empathy, and broadens perspectives.
• Engaging with literature enhances social-emotional skills and nurtures creativity.
• Literature promotes reading engagement, language development, and a lifelong love for learning.

Cultivating Critical Thinking and Perspective Taking

Literature in education fosters critical thinking skills and encourages readers to embrace multiple perspectives. Analyzing literary texts promotes deep thinking, problem-solving, and the ability to analyze complex ideas. Through the exploration of diverse characters and narratives, literature challenges readers to question assumptions, consider different viewpoints, and develop their own unique perspectives.

By immersing themselves in different literary worlds, learners gain a broader understanding of human experiences and cultures. Literature provides insights into diverse societies, historical contexts, and social issues, fostering empathy and expanding cultural understanding. It enables readers to step into the shoes of characters from different backgrounds, allowing them to develop a greater appreciation for diverse perspectives and fostering a more inclusive worldview.

The Power of Literature in Developing Critical Thinking

In addition to broadening perspectives, literature also plays a significant role in developing critical thinking skills. The complexity of literary texts encourages readers to analyze and interpret information, make connections, and evaluate different arguments. Engaging with literature requires readers to think critically, analyze narratives, and draw conclusions based on evidence from the text. These skills are transferable and can be applied to other subjects and real-life situations.

Overall, literature’s ability to cultivate critical thinking and perspective taking makes it an essential component of education. By incorporating literature into educational settings, learners are equipped with the skills necessary to navigate a complex world, embrace diversity, and think critically about the challenges they may face. To learn more about the benefits of literature in education, visit Exquisitive Education .

Building Cultural Capital and Empathy

Literature in education builds cultural capital and nurtures empathy by immersing readers in diverse cultural landscapes and fostering emotional connections. Through literary works, students gain valuable insights into different societies, traditions, and historical contexts. They develop an understanding and appreciation for cultures that are different from their own, broadening their perspectives and promoting cultural sensitivity.

Engaging with literature also allows readers to connect deeply with characters and their experiences. By empathizing with fictional individuals, students develop a greater understanding of human emotions and motivations. They learn to see the world through diverse lenses, cultivating empathy and compassion.

Expanding Cultural Horizons

One of the key benefits of literature in education is the expansion of cultural horizons. By exploring various literary works, students are exposed to different cultural backgrounds, allowing them to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the world. They learn about unique customs, traditions, and values, fostering a respect for diversity. This exposure creates a foundation for global citizenship and prepares students to navigate an increasingly interconnected world.

Furthermore, literature helps students recognize their own biases and challenges preconceived notions. By immersing themselves in stories that highlight the experiences of marginalized groups, they develop empathy and a heightened awareness of social injustices. This, in turn, encourages them to become advocates for equality and change.

In conclusion, literature in education plays a vital role in building cultural capital and nurturing empathy. It allows students to explore diverse cultures, broaden their perspectives, and develop a greater understanding of the human experience. By immersing themselves in literary works, learners gain the necessary tools to navigate a multicultural world with empathy and compassion. To unlock the potential of learners and promote personal development, integrating literature into educational curricula is essential.

Enhancing Social-Emotional Skills and Creativity

Literature in education enhances social-emotional skills, fostering emotional intelligence and nurturing creativity. Engaging with literary texts helps students develop a deeper understanding of their own emotions and those of others. Through the exploration of diverse characters and their experiences, readers are encouraged to develop empathy and connect with different perspectives. This emotional intelligence not only enhances their interpersonal relationships but also equips them with vital skills for navigating the complexities of the world.

Moreover, literature sparks creativity and imagination. As students immerse themselves in the rich language and vivid imagery of literature, they are inspired to think innovatively and critically. Literary texts provide a canvas for students to explore new ideas, challenge conventions, and expand their creative horizons. This creative mindset nurtures their ability to approach problems from multiple angles and find unique solutions.

By incorporating literature into education, educators create an environment that values emotional growth and creative thinking. This integration ensures that students develop the social-emotional skills necessary for success in various aspects of life. Whether it’s fostering empathy, promoting critical thinking, or nurturing creativity, literature plays a pivotal role in unlocking the potential of learners and shaping them into well-rounded individuals.

Table: Benefits of Literature in Education

Embracing literature in education not only unlocks the potential of individuals but also benefits society as a whole. By fostering social-emotional skills and creativity, literature equips students with the tools to navigate an ever-changing world with compassion and innovation. It is through literature that learners can develop their full capacity and become active contributors to their communities. To explore the transformative power of literature in education, visit Exquisitive Education .

Promoting Reading Engagement and Language Development

Literature in education promotes reading engagement and facilitates language development, fostering a lifelong love for reading and enhancing communication skills. Through exposure to different literary genres, students are encouraged to explore a variety of narratives, themes, and writing styles, sparking their interest and curiosity. As they immerse themselves in the world of literature, they develop the habit of reading regularly, expanding their knowledge and understanding of the world around them.

Reading literature provides students with an opportunity to encounter new vocabulary, idiomatic expressions, and sentence structures. By encountering these linguistic elements in context, students develop a deeper understanding of their meaning and usage, enhancing their language skills. The rich language models found in literature also serve as a source of inspiration for students to improve their own writing and communication abilities.

Benefits of Literature in Education

Engaging with literature not only promotes reading engagement and language development but also nurtures critical thinking skills, empathy, and cultural understanding. Analyzing literary texts requires students to think critically, evaluate evidence, and make connections, fostering their ability to solve problems and analyze complex ideas.

As students encounter characters from different cultures and backgrounds, they gain insight and empathy into diverse experiences, fostering their ability to connect with others on a deeper level. Additionally, literature encourages creativity and imagination, as students are inspired to envision alternative worlds, develop unique perspectives, and explore new possibilities.

In conclusion, literature in education plays a vital role in promoting reading engagement, language development, critical thinking skills, empathy, and cultural understanding. By using literature as a tool for learning, students not only acquire knowledge but also develop a love for reading that lasts a lifetime. It equips them with the necessary skills to excel in various subjects and lays the foundation for their future learning and personal growth. Discover the transformative power of literature in education at Exquisitive Education .

Building Background Knowledge and Lifelong Learning

Literature in education builds background knowledge and fosters a passion for lifelong learning, empowering students to become curious and knowledgeable individuals. By immersing themselves in literary works, students gain insights into diverse topics, historical events, and cultural phenomena. Whether exploring classic literature or contemporary works, students expand their understanding of the world and develop a broader perspective.

Through literature, students can explore different time periods, societies, and cultures, gaining a deeper appreciation for the complexities of human experiences. They develop empathy and understanding by connecting with characters who face various challenges and navigate different social and cultural contexts. Literature provides a window into different ways of life, teaching students to embrace diversity and cultivate a sense of respect for others.

Furthermore, literature fosters a love for lifelong learning. As students engage with different literary genres, they develop a thirst for knowledge and a desire to explore new ideas. Literature stimulates intellectual curiosity, encouraging students to seek new information, ask critical questions, and engage in meaningful discussions. The experiences gained from reading literature lay the foundation for a lifelong journey of learning and personal growth, equipping students with the tools they need to thrive in an ever-changing world.

The Value of Literature Education

The value of literature education extends beyond the classroom. It equips students with essential skills such as critical thinking, analysis, and interpretation. Through close reading and textual analysis, students learn to analyze complex ideas, identify underlying themes and motifs, and make connections between different literary works. These skills are transferable across subjects, enhancing students’ overall academic performance.

Moreover, literature improves language and communication skills. By exposing students to rich vocabulary, diverse language styles, and intricate narrative structures, literature contributes to the development of strong reading and writing abilities. Students learn to express themselves effectively, articulate their thoughts and ideas, and engage in thoughtful discussions.

In conclusion, literature in education plays a vital role in building background knowledge, fostering a passion for lifelong learning, and nurturing critical thinking skills. It broadens students’ horizons, enhances their understanding of the world, and promotes empathy and cultural understanding. By encouraging students to explore different literary works, educators empower them to become well-rounded individuals who are curious, knowledgeable, and capable of reaching their full potential.

Literature’s Impact on Learning Outcomes: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa

Literature in education has proven to have a significant impact on learning outcomes, particularly in regions like Sub-Saharan Africa where learning poverty rates are high. Successful educational programs like EdoBEST in Nigeria have demonstrated the positive effects of literature on children’s educational development. Through the study of literature, students not only improve their language skills and vocabulary, but also enhance their critical thinking abilities and cultural understanding.

Reading literature allows students to explore diverse perspectives, cultures, and experiences, expanding their worldview and promoting empathy. It cultivates a love for learning and encourages students to think critically, analyze complex ideas, and problem-solve. By engaging with literary texts, students develop the necessary skills to excel in various subjects, ultimately improving their overall academic performance.

Moreover, literature education in prisons has shown promising results in reducing recidivism rates and providing inmates with a sense of purpose. By offering inmates the opportunity to explore different narratives and reflect on their own experiences, literature education fosters personal growth and increases the chances of successful reintegration into society. It equips inmates with valuable skills such as communication, self-expression, and empathy, which are crucial for their rehabilitation and future success.

In conclusion, literature plays a crucial role in unlocking the potential of learners and promoting personal development. Its impact on learning outcomes, especially in regions with high learning poverty rates like Sub-Saharan Africa, cannot be overstated. By incorporating literature into education, we can equip students with the skills and knowledge needed to thrive academically, socially, and emotionally. To learn more about the benefits of literature in education, visit Exquisitive Education .

Literature Education in Prisons: Reducing Recidivism and Providing Purpose

Literature education in prisons plays a crucial role in reducing recidivism rates by providing inmates with a sense of purpose and fostering personal development. According to studies, prisoners who engage in literature programs are more likely to develop critical thinking and communication skills, which are essential for successful reintegration into society. By immersing themselves in literary works, inmates gain a deeper understanding of human experiences, empathy, and self-reflection.

A literature education program in prisons offers inmates an opportunity for intellectual growth and personal transformation. Through reading and analyzing various literary texts, inmates can explore different perspectives, challenge their own beliefs, and develop a broader worldview. This process not only helps them expand their knowledge but also equips them with essential social and emotional skills, such as empathy and self-awareness.

Moreover, literature education in prisons encourages creativity and self-expression among inmates. Engaging with literary works allows them to tap into their imagination and express their thoughts and emotions. This creative outlet enhances their sense of identity and helps them develop a positive sense of self. By fostering a love for literature, inmates can discover new passions and interests, which can significantly contribute to their personal growth and motivation for change.

Success Stories: Literature Programs in Correctional Facilities

These success stories highlight the transformative power of literature education in correctional facilities. Through literature, inmates can find hope, inspiration, and a path towards personal redemption. By empowering them with the tools necessary for self-reflection and personal growth, literature education offers a chance for rehabilitation and a brighter future.

In conclusion, literature education in prisons plays a critical role in reducing recidivism rates by providing inmates with a sense of purpose and fostering personal development. Through the exploration of literary works, inmates gain valuable skills, such as critical thinking, empathy, and creativity, which are vital for their successful reintegration into society. By investing in literature education programs, we can unlock the potential of inmates and create a pathway to a more rehabilitative justice system.

Literature in Education: Unlocking Learners’ Potential

Literature in education is a powerful tool that unlocks learners’ potential, nurturing their intellectual growth, and empowering them for success. Through the exploration of literary texts, students develop critical thinking skills, empathy, and cultural understanding. By engaging with diverse narratives and perspectives, they broaden their worldview and become more adept at analyzing complex ideas and problems.

Reading literature not only enhances cognitive abilities but also promotes social-emotional skills and creativity. It helps students develop emotional intelligence, empathy, and self-awareness, enabling them to navigate interpersonal relationships and understand diverse experiences. Additionally, literature sparks imagination and creativity, encouraging students to think outside the box and approach challenges with innovative solutions.

Furthermore, literature plays a significant role in promoting reading engagement and language development. Through exposure to different genres and styles, students develop a love for reading, which in turn expands their vocabulary and strengthens their communication skills. The rich language models in literary texts serve as valuable resources for language acquisition and proficiency.

As evidenced in Sub-Saharan Africa, where learning poverty rates are high, literature has a profound impact on educational outcomes. Successful programs like EdoBEST in Nigeria demonstrate how literature can maximize the potential of millions of children. In addition, literature education in prisons has proven to reduce recidivism rates by providing inmates with a sense of purpose and fostering personal growth.

In conclusion, literature in education paves the way for learners to unlock their potential. It cultivates critical thinking, empathy, cultural understanding, and personal development. By harnessing the power of literature, educators can empower students to become lifelong learners, equipped with the skills and knowledge necessary for success in an ever-changing world.

In conclusion, literature in education plays a pivotal role in fostering critical thinking, empathy, cultural understanding, and personal development, making it an indispensable component of a well-rounded education. By studying literature, students enhance their critical thinking skills, as they analyze complex ideas, solve problems, and engage in deep thinking. Literature also promotes empathy, allowing readers to connect with diverse characters and gain a better understanding of different cultures and experiences.

Moreover, literature builds cultural capital by exposing students to a wide range of literary works that reflect various traditions, historical contexts, and perspectives. This exposure not only broadens their cultural understanding but also cultivates a sense of empathy towards others. Additionally, engaging with literature develops social-emotional skills, as students explore and understand different emotions, perspectives, and relationships.

Furthermore, literature in education sparks creativity and imagination, encouraging students to think outside the box and explore innovative ideas. It also enhances reading engagement, promoting a love for reading and expanding language development. Through exposure to different genres and language models, students acquire a rich vocabulary and improve their communication skills.

Importantly, literature in education builds background knowledge and supports lifelong learning. It equips students with a deep understanding of various topics, historical events, and cultural phenomena. This knowledge not only prepares them for academic success but also instills a love for learning and encourages continuous exploration of new ideas throughout their lives.

Moreover, literature’s impact goes beyond traditional educational settings. In Sub-Saharan Africa, where learning poverty rates are high, literature plays a crucial role in maximizing the potential of millions of children. Successful educational programs like EdoBEST in Nigeria have demonstrated the positive impact of literature on learning outcomes, paving the way for a brighter future.

Even in correctional facilities, literature education has shown significant benefits. By providing inmates with a sense of purpose and personal growth, literature reduces recidivism rates and helps individuals successfully reintegrate into society. It empowers them with the skills and knowledge needed to make positive changes in their lives.

Overall, literature has the power to unlock the potential of learners and promote personal development. It cultivates critical thinking, empathy, cultural understanding, and creativity, while also improving reading engagement, language development, and background knowledge. By recognizing the importance of literature in education, we can create a society that values lifelong learning and embraces the transformative power of literature.

Q: Why is literature important in education?

A: Literature is important in education because it unlocks opportunities and lays the foundation for future learning. It cultivates critical thinking, empathy, and broadens cultural understanding. Studying literature enhances language skills, promotes reading engagement, and builds background knowledge. It also has a positive impact on learning outcomes in Sub-Saharan Africa and reduces recidivism rates in prisons.

Q: How does literature cultivate critical thinking and perspective taking?

A: Literature cultivates critical thinking by promoting deep analysis and problem-solving. It encourages readers to consider different perspectives and analyze complex ideas. By engaging with diverse literary texts, readers develop the ability to think critically and understand multiple viewpoints.

Q: What role does literature play in building cultural capital and empathy?

A: Literature builds cultural capital by introducing readers to different cultures, traditions, and historical contexts. It fosters empathy by allowing readers to connect with characters and understand their experiences and emotions. Through literature, readers gain a deeper appreciation for cultural diversity and develop a sense of empathy towards others.

Q: How does literature enhance social-emotional skills and creativity?

A: Literature enhances social-emotional skills by nurturing emotional intelligence, empathy, and self-awareness. It encourages readers to engage with complex emotions and explore their own feelings. Additionally, literature sparks creativity and imagination by presenting unique narratives and challenging traditional thinking.

Q: How does literature promote reading engagement and language development?

A: Literature promotes reading engagement by exposing students to different genres and encouraging a love for reading. It provides rich vocabulary and language models that contribute to language development and communication skills. By immersing themselves in literary works, students develop strong reading and language skills.

Q: How does literature build background knowledge and support lifelong learning?

A: Literature builds background knowledge by expanding students’ understanding of various topics, historical events, and cultural phenomena. It encourages curiosity and a love for learning, fostering a lifelong passion for acquiring new knowledge and exploring diverse ideas.

Q: What is the impact of literature on learning outcomes in Sub-Saharan Africa?

A: Literature has a positive impact on learning outcomes in Sub-Saharan Africa, where learning poverty is high. Successful educational programs like EdoBEST in Nigeria have demonstrated the positive effects of literature on learning outcomes. By incorporating literature into education, it maximizes the potential of millions of children and improves their educational achievements.

Q: How does literature education in prisons reduce recidivism rates?

A: Literature education in prisons provides inmates with a sense of purpose, personal growth, and reduces reoffense rates. By engaging with literary works, inmates can reflect on their experiences and gain new perspectives. Literature education fosters a desire for personal development and enhances inmates’ chances of successful reintegration into society.

Q: How does literature unlock learners’ potential in education?

A: Literature unlocks learners’ potential by promoting personal growth, critical thinking skills, empathy, and cultural understanding. It equips learners with the necessary skills to excel in various subjects and lays the foundation for future learning. Studying literature in educational settings has long-term value and contributes to the overall development of individuals.

About The Author

Ethan Emerson

Ethan Emerson is a passionate author and dedicated advocate for the transformative power of education. With a background in teaching and a love for writing, Ethan brings a unique blend of expertise and creativity to his contributions on ExquisitiveEducation.com .His articles are a delightful mix of insightful knowledge and engaging storytelling, aiming to inspire and empower learners of all ages. Ethan's mission is to ignite the spark of curiosity and foster a love for learning in every reader.Ethan Emerson, is your companion in the realm of general education exploration. With a passion for knowledge, He delves into the intricate world of Education Expenses & Discounts , uncovering financial insights for your educational journey. From the vitality of Physical Education to the synergy of Education & Technology , Ethan's here to bridge the gap between traditional and innovative learning methods. Discover the art of crafting impressive Resume & Personal Documentation in Education , as well as insights into diverse Career Paths, Degrees & Educational Requirements . Join Ethan in navigating through a sea of Educational Courses & Classes , exploring the nuances of various Education Systems , and understanding the empowering realm of Special Education . With an eye on Teaching & Teachers , He offers a glimpse into the world of educators who shape minds. Let's unlock Studying Tips & Learning Methods that turn education into a delightful journey of growth with Exquisitive Education .

Related Posts

Unlocking Potential: What is Invitational Learning Explained

Unraveling What is Physical Education Pedagogy – Deep Dive

Understanding What is Cognitive Coaching in Education

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Welcome! We are two homeschooling moms and our goal is to help you better understand different educational philosophies and how to practically apply them in your homeschools, from your littles up to your highschoolers! Part of that journey means growing in literary depth and breadth, for both the homeschooling parent and student, and we are excited to share our meanderings and wanderings with you! Katherine & Natacha

Bookish Beginnings: A Homeschool Education Podcast Katherine Clayton and Natacha Jamshidi

• APR 6, 2024

How to Get Your Child to Love Reading!

We all know that literacy is foundational to education, but loving to read, more than knowing how to read, is so important in developing the love of learning and becoming a life-long learner. In this podcast we discuss practical ways in which you can encourage your child to learn to love reading. Thanks for listening!

• MAR 15, 2024

Classic versus Modern Literature... Which is Better?

In today's episode we are discuss the common debate of which is better: old classics or modern literature.  With the recent trend of banning classics, while it seems anything goes in modern literature, what are our children left with?  And what would Charlotte Mason think about all of this?  Listen now to find out! Books mentioned in this episode: Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte The Unpleasantness at the Bellona Club by Dorothy Sayers To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck Charlotte Mason Volume 6: A Philosophy of Education   Little House on the prairie by Laura Ingalls Wilder Penderwicks by Jeanne Birdsall Wild Robot by Peter Brown Onward by Dolores Johnson Everest by Alexandra Stewart Scientists in the field Bees: Hive detectives Scientists in the field Wolves: Once a wolf Naughtiest Unicorn by Pip Bird Babysitter’s club by Anne M Martin Chronicles of Narnia by CS Lewis The Hobbit & The Lord of the Rings Trilogy by JRR Tolkien The Wind in the Willows by Kenneth Grahame Little Women by Louisa May Alcott Little Men by Louisa May Alcott Little Princess by Frances Hodgson Burnett Huck Finn by Mark Twain Little White Horse by Elizabeth Harry Potter Series by JK Rowling

• MAR 10, 2024

Yes, Shakespeare is That Easy! How to Study Shakespeare for All Ages

Shakespeare is one of those great writers that Charlotte Mason believed students of all ages should read and enjoy, yet most educational institutions reserve Shakespeare for the high school years.  We premise in this episode, that the sooner your children are introduced to Shakespeare, the better!  But how can you accomplish this task, you might ask? Listen now to find out! Books mentioned in this episode: Kindred by Octavia Butler Lady of the Rivers by Philippa Gregory Midsummer Night’s Dream by Shakespeare Blue Fairy Book by Andrew Lang  (contains Blue Beard Fairy Tale) Illustrated Stories from Shakespeare by Usborne Midsummer Night’s Dream by Sparknotes Arkangel Productions Midsummer Night’s Dream Tales from Shakespeare by Lamb Beautiful Stories from Shakespeare by Nesbit Tales from Shakespeare by Marcia Williams Incorrigible Children of Ashton Place by Maryrose Wood Harry Potter by JK Rowling Green Ember by SD Smith The Hobbit by JRR Tolkien The Borrowers by Mary Norton

• MAR 2, 2024

Did Everyone Else Get it Wrong? Charlotte Mason Thought So.

From ancient philosophers to modern  child psychology, the popular opinion has been that children, at least from a educational standpoint, are less than capable.  This has led to educational methods and philosophies designed to simplify how and what children are taught, with the underlying  belief that children must learn in age appropriate stages.  But Charlotte Mason adamantly believed in a very different philosophy.   Take a listen to find out exactly how Charlotte Mason stands out from every other educational method out there, and how you can apply her first principle of her educational philosophy in your home and homeschool!

• © Katherine Clayton and Natacha Jamshidi

Top Podcasts In Education

You might also like.

Mariam Lam: Championing equity in higher education

Mariam Lam, Ph.D. Comparative Literature '06

By Munyao Kilolo, Ph.D. student in comparative literature

Mariam Lam, the Vice Chancellor and Chief Diversity Officer at the University of California, Riverside, is an anteater twice over. After receiving her B.A. in English (with a minor in Spanish) in 1994, Lam stayed at UC Irvine to pursue her Ph.D. in Comparative Literature, finishing in 2006. Lam’s experience with mentorship, with faculty both within and outside the department, is one of the reasons she was glad to stay in Irvine for grad school.

Strong, supportive mentorship, especially from her advisor, Gabriele Schwab, but also other faculty mentors like Jane Newman and Ketu Katrak, taught Lam many valuable lessons that she continues to find useful in her current work at UC Riverside. Schwab taught her how to navigate academic and institutional politics and how, as a first-generation student, to apply herself despite her fears and frustrations.

And Lam’s positive experiences with mentorship have stayed with her, as she endeavors to support her own academic mentees. At the most recent Association of Asian Studies conference, for example, she was overjoyed to meet up with four of her mentees and learn how they, too, focus on providing quality mentorship and advising for their students. “Students often have difficulty with people who are just competitive and awful. I've always tried to build trust. I want them to come to me for advice – and use me as a sounding board. We need to create a generation of good mentors in academia,” Lam adds.

With and from the community

While at UC Irvine, Lam was surrounded by her small family and a large Vietnamese American and Southeast Asian American community. Initially, this felt like a burden because she was constantly needed for translation work, like helping people with things like healthcare documents. Going to college was a relief but it added more to that burden.

Lam explains, “Throughout my undergraduate studies, I thought I had to choose between helping the community and my academic work. The two felt like they were in competition with one another. But graduate school changed that impression. I realized that the community was actually a great intellectual resource for me. But I don't think academia often treats communities that way.”

Lam relied upon her communities in a variety of ways – including as an invaluable source of research support. Her dissertation work was in literature and film, and many of her objects of research, especially literature written in Vietnamese, were not easy to obtain because of the politicization of post-1975 literature coming out of Vietnam. Although the UC system had some good holdings, availability in the national libraries was limited.

“It was funny because in the early days of Vietnamese cinema and media, including VCDs, bootlegs and illegal copies, my parents would go grocery shopping and find me these little VCDs, and they would buy them. So, they became my research assistants,” Lam laughs, remembering the experience.

She found endless opportunities to learn oral histories from the lived experiences, ethnic enclaves and institutional networks that the community created in Orange County. This was also the beginning of her diversity work in higher education after realizing that she did not have much of a student community in her own discipline.

Taking one for the team

Lam joined the UC Riverside faculty in 2002 without any plans to work in administration. But when her predecessor decided to return to faculty, the Chancellor and Provost searched for a successor who would focus on building the necessary infrastructure that could sensitively address issues of diversity, equity and inclusion for the campus.

“Senior administrators wanted to address issues related to campus climate, recruitment and retention. When I started at UC Riverside, I was doing Senate faculty governance stuff, yes, but didn’t consider applying for the job until my faculty friends saw who else was applying. And the people who were applying for the job were people who just wanted administrative power. They didn't know much about race, gender, or sexuality. And so I applied after my faculty friends told me that I needed to take one for the team,” Lam jokes.

Lam accepted the job ready to create new programming in order to help with climate, recruitment and retention issues. However, she soon found out that a lot of the work involved visiting departments to assist them with working through tension-filled issues, like faculty/graduate student disagreements. Lam reflects “I learned how to deal with faculty who may think they are progressive but still hold on to regressive ways of approaching work. I have also had to learn how to help students adopt strategies for dealing with the power dynamics and relationships, especially as they work with committee members who try to pull dissertations in different directions,” she adds.

Literary studies and DEI

Lam was unsure how her advanced training in comparative literature would translate into the very practical environments of DEI work. Lam’s dear departed friend, Stephen Cullenberg, who was Dean of the liberal arts college, gave her assurance during this time of hesitation and doubt. “I remember telling him that I would tell people what I think to their face. How could I be a good administrator when I’m not so good with that kind of politicking? And he said to me, ‘Mariam, if you go into administrative work thinking that you need to look like the institution and behave like other administrators, you will not be a good administrator. The institution – not you – has to change.’”

Drawing upon this advice, Lam embraced her training in literature to work in administration in her own ways. Though it has been difficult to maintain her publication record in a role that is 100% administrative, Lam finds many moments of great satisfaction in her administrative work. To share just one of her many proud achievements, Lam and her team were among the first in the UC system to create a Faculty Equity Advisors Program that works on healthy departmental culture and climate, in addition to recruitment. Piloted at UC Riverside, the team designed and implemented the program with support from the Academic Senate Committee on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (CODEI). Seeing its success, the UC system-wide committee on diversity and inclusion (UCAAD) advocated that the program be implemented across all ten campuses of the UC system.

“So, for me, it ranges from big achievements to small, everyday diversity and inclusion matters. For example, in residential life, when a student who is transitioning gender suddenly finds their roommates are discriminatory, tensions rise. My team has worked with housing to create additional platforms that help students preemptively match with preferred roommates in all respects. And small achievements like these make me very happy.”

Interested in reading more from the School of Humanities? Sign up for our monthly newsletter.

See the humanities in action

Copyright © 2023 UC Regents. All rights reserved.

Privacy Policy

• Newsletters

IE 11 Not Supported

Teachers pick their favorite sci-fi texts for ai education, to prompt class discussions about the potential consequences of artificial intelligence, teachers can draw from a long history of literature on the subject, from classic novels to short stories and memoirs..

'AI 2041' BY KAI FU-LEE AND CHEN QIUFAN

'all systems red: murderbot diaries' by martha wells, 'ender's game' by orson scott card, 'the first sally, or trurl's electronic bard' by stanislaw lem, 'folding beijing' by hao jingfang, 'frankenstein' by mary shelley, 'girl decoded: a scientist's quest to reclaim our humanity by bringing emotional intelligence to technology' by rana el kaliouby, 'valedictorian' by n.k. jemison.

College of Education

Wayfinding Tools for People With Visual Impairments in Real-World Settings: A Literature Review

by Lacey Friedly November 4th 2021 Share

Researchers  Amy Parker ,  Martin Swobodzinski , Julie Wright, Kyrsten Hansen and Becky Morton of Portland State University, along with Elizabeth Schaller of American Printing House for the Blind, have published a literature review in  Frontiers in Education:  Wayfinding Tools for People With Visual Impairments in Real-World Settings: A Literature Review of Recent Studies.

The literature review, published in October 2021, and a  case study published in September 2021  in the same journal are both related to an ongoing project led by Swobodzinski. The project,  Seamless Wayfinding by Individuals with Functional Disability in Indoor and Outdoor Spaces: An Investigation into Lived Experiences, Data Needs, and Technology Requirements , is funded by the National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC).

The October article reviews 35 peer reviewed articles in order to identify and describe the types of wayfinding devices that people who are blind, visually impaired or deafblind use while navigating indoors and/or outdoors in dynamic travel contexts.

Within this investigation, the researchers discovered some characteristics of participants with visual impairments, routes traveled, and real-world environments that have been included in recent wayfinding research as well as information regarding the institutions, agencies, and funding sources that enable these investigations.

Results showed that 33 out of the 35 studies which met inclusionary criteria integrated the use of smart device technology. Many of these devices were supplemented by bluetooth low-energy beacons, and other sensors with more recent studies integrating LIDAR scanning. Identified studies included scant information about participant’s visual acuities or etiologies with a few exceptions, which limits the usability of the findings for this highly heterogeneous population. Themes derived from this study are categorized around the individual traveler’s needs; the wayfinding technologies identified and their perceived efficacy; the contexts and routes for wayfinding tasks; and the institutional support offered for sustaining wayfinding research.

Human wayfinding and navigation allow human beings to fully participate in the environment and are essential elements for leading healthy, economically sustainable, and full lives. The NITC project aims to drive forward the development of standards and innovation in mobile wayfinding as it relates to the integration of indoor and outdoor wayfinding and routing of visually-impaired, blind, and deafblind pedestrian travelers.

Photo by  Halfpoint /iStock

The National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC) is one of seven U.S. Department of Transportation national university transportation centers. NITC is a program of the Transportation Research and Education Center (TREC) at Portland State University. This PSU-led research partnership also includes the Oregon Institute of Technology, University of Arizona, University of Oregon, University of Texas at Arlington and University of Utah. We pursue our theme — improving mobility of people and goods to build strong communities — through research, education and technology transfer.

Related Links:

• Read this story on the TREC site

Literature in Education

Cite this chapter.

• Geoff Hall 2  

Part of the book series: Research and Practice in Applied Linguistics ((RPAL))

474 Accesses

Chapter 1 sketched the linguistic features of literary texts which research has established, notably its variety and its relations to the spoken and to everyday creativity and language use. Students could in principle learn much about the target language through the variety present in the range of texts known as ‘literary’. Nevertheless, no distinct single linguistic identity can be pinned down. The possible linguistic advantage of literary texts for learners of a language (an important advantage) would seem if anything to be its sheer range, which is unparalleled in other text types, and the creative linguistic, cognitive and communicational strategies required of the successful literary reader, as outlined in Chapter 2. But apart from claims for the linguistic value of literary studies, literature has traditionally been taught across a variety of contexts as a set of particularly highly valued and supposedly engaging texts Indeed for many readers literature is first or most extensively a schooled experience. The enthusiastic readers of literature in later life reported in Long (2003) or Hartley (2001) are mostly university graduates, though reading is widely advocated and practised to some degree in prisons, therapeutic contexts and (by some) as a key indicator of a healthy civic society. I now turn to these wider cultural and educational claims which also apply to foreign or second language reading as not only often a practical utilitarian need, but more widely advocated educationally.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Unable to display preview.  Download preview PDF.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Nottingham Ningbo, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2015 Geoff Hall

About this chapter

Hall, G. (2015). Literature in Education. In: Literature in Language Education. Research and Practice in Applied Linguistics. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137331847_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137331847_4

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, London

Print ISBN : 978-1-137-33183-0

Online ISBN : 978-1-137-33184-7

eBook Packages : Palgrave Language & Linguistics Collection Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research